TRANSPORT

Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what service level targets his Department has set for the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency.

Robert Goodwill: The service level targets that have been set for the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency can be found on pages 11 to 13 of the DVLA's Business Plan for 2013-14. The business plan is available online at:
	www.gov.uk/government/publications/dvla-business-plan-2013-to-14

NORTHERN IRELAND

Northern Ireland Independent Monitoring Commission

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what consideration she has given to the re-introduction of the Independent Monitoring Commission; and if she will make a statement.

Theresa Villiers: I consider the Independent Monitoring Commission's remit to be complete.
	The Independent Monitoring Commission was established under an agreement by the then UK and Irish Governments in 2004 to deal with a very specific set of circumstances that pertained at that time, but no longer exist. The Independent Monitoring Commission and the UK and Irish Governments agreed in 2011 that there was no longer a role for the Commission to play in Northern Ireland.

Police

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps she is taking to consult the Retired Police Officers' Association of Northern Ireland to discuss dealing with the past; and if she will make a statement.

Theresa Villiers: I welcome the Retired Police Officers' Association of Northern Ireland's recent engagement with the All-Party Talks. They have an important contribution to make to this debate. I am happy to meet the association to discuss the past, should they so wish.

WOMEN AND EQUALITIES

Guide Dogs

Mike Hancock: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities what steps her Department is taking to ensure business owners comply with the Equality Act 2010 in respect of guide dog and hearing dog owners.

Helen Grant: Service providers and employers with obligations and duties under the Equality Act 2010 are responsible for ensuring they comply with the legislation. The Equalities and Human Rights Commission has produced guidance for service providers on the duty to make reasonable adjustments and assistance dogs, which can be found at this link:
	http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/service-providers-guidance/the-duty-to-make-reasonable-adjustments-to-remove-barriers-for-disabled-people/

Guide Dogs

Mike Hancock: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities if she will review the effects of the Equality Act 2010 on owners of guide dogs and hearing dogs.

Helen Grant: The Government is committed to reviewing the Equality Act 2010 within five years of its introduction as part of the Post Implementation Review. The review will assess whether the Act is working as intended.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Equality Act 2010

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will bring forward legislative proposals to introduce on-the-spot fines for individuals, businesses and organisations that do not comply with the Equality Act 2010.

Helen Grant: The Government has no plans to introduce on-the-spot fines for those who do not comply with the Equality Act 2010. Parliament's view in enacting this legislation was that the Courts are best placed to consider cases of alleged disability discrimination.

Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which Ministers in the Northern Ireland Executive were consulted about provisions in the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill which apply specifically to Northern Ireland; and if she will make a statement.

Helen Grant: Nelson McCausland, the Minister for Social Development in the Northern Ireland Executive was consulted about provisions in the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill which apply specifically to Northern Ireland.

National Lottery: Olympic Games 2012

Gareth Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she expects the first receipts from the sale of Olympic assets to be returned to the (a) Big Lottery Fund , (b) Heritage Lottery fund, (c) other lottery distributers; and if she will make a statement.

Helen Grant: The first receipts from the sale of Olympic assets will be those arising on completion of the sale of the Olympic Village in 2014. Funds will be returned initially to the Olympic Lottery Distribution Fund (OLDF). Subject to affirmative resolution in both Houses the OLDF will be closed in 2014 and the returned funds transferred to the National Lottery Distribution Fund (NLDF).

Optical Fibres

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what length of fibre optic cable was laid in (a) Haltemprice and Howden constituency, (b) the East Riding of Yorkshire, (c) England and (d) the UK in each of the last three years.

Edward Vaizey: Ofcom reported the following figures, in its infrastructure update, about the availability of next generation broadband in East Riding of Yorkshire, England and the UK. Figures for the Haltemprice and Howden constituency were not reported by Ofcom.
	
		
			 Percentage 
			  2011 2012 2013 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 0 20.8 21.6 
			 England 61 68 76 
			 UK 58 65 73 
		
	
	BDUK allocated £5,570,000 to the East Riding project, which signed its contract with suppliers in September 2013 and is currently in the detailed planning phase in advance of the rollout which is due to commence in 2014.

UK City of Culture

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many visits she has made to each of the four cities which bid to be UK City of Culture in 2017.

Edward Vaizey: I visited Dundee and Hull and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Maria Miller), visited Leicester and Swansea Bay between the announcement of the shortlist and the final decision on UK City of Culture 2017. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport then visited Hull on the day it was announced as UK City of Culture 2017.

UK City of Culture: Londonderry

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what discussions she has had with Ministers in the Northern Ireland Executive on the legacy of Londonderry being UK City of Culture 2013 for that city and for Northern Ireland.

Edward Vaizey: The legacy from UK City of Culture 2013 is a matter for Derry-Londonderry and the Northern Ireland authorities. I discussed the legacy with cultural leaders in Derry-Londonderry during my recent visit to the city and noted that the Northern Ireland Executive had set out its legacy plan to build on the success of UK City of Culture 2013 when I met the Northern Ireland Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure. I welcome the £2 million given, by the Northern Ireland Government.

UK City of Culture: Londonderry

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what funds her Department contributed to (a) marketing and (b) staging of events relating to Londonderry UK City of Culture 2013.

Edward Vaizey: Funding for UK City of Culture 2013 events is a matter for Derry-Londonderry. However, in recognition of the fact that Derry-Londonderry is the first UK City of Culture, DCMS made a grant of £25,000 to support the Celtronic Festival earlier this year, and has offered a further grant of £75,000 to help cover the costs of other UK City of Culture events.

TREASURY

Children: Day Care

William Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  if he will estimate how many households with children (a) will and (b) will not benefit from his Department's proposed childcare tax relief and uplift in universal credit to aid childcare costs in 2015 and 2016; how many such households contain (i) one adult in work, (ii) one adult not in work, (iii) two adults not in work and (iv) one adult in work and one not in work; and how many children will be affected in each such category;
	(2)  if he will make an assessment of the effects on the female employment rate of his Department's proposed childcare tax relief and uplift in universal credit to aid childcare costs in 2015 and 2016.

Nicky Morgan: The information requested is not available.
	Information on the new scheme for tax-free childcare will not be available until the consultation launched on 5 August is complete and the policy details have been fully defined. The Government response to the consultation will be published in due course.

Children: Day Care

William Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make an assessment of the potential effect of his Department's proposed childcare tax relief and uplift in universal credit to aid childcare costs in 2015 and 2016 on (a) relative and (b) absolute levels of child poverty in those years.

Nicky Morgan: The Government do not forecast the number of children in poverty. The Government is working to develop better measures of child poverty which include, but go beyond, income to provide a more accurate picture of the reality of child poverty.

Children: Day Care

William Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make an estimate of the distribution across each income decile of those households which (a) will and (b) will not benefit from his Department's proposed childcare tax relief and uplift in universal credit to aid childcare costs in 2015 and 2016.

Nicky Morgan: The Government will publish a full impact assessment, setting out the effects of tax free childcare on households, in due course.
	This Government has been the first to publish distributional analysis of all its measures in the ‘Impact on Households’ annex, at each Budget and autumn statement since June Budget 2010.

Income Tax

Guy Opperman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many of the lowest paid no longer pay income tax as a result of changes to taxation introduced since May 2010 in (a) the UK, (b) the North East and (c) Northumberland.

David Gauke: The cumulative effect of the Government's increases in the personal allowance for those aged under 65 years (born after 5 April 1948 from 2013-14 tax year) since 2010-11 will take 2.7 million people out of the income tax system by April 2014. 110,000 of them are in the north-east region.
	These estimates are based on the 2010-11 Survey of Personal Incomes, projected to 2014-15 using economic assumptions consistent with the Office for Budget Responsibility's March 2013 economic and fiscal outlook.
	Estimates at the unitary authority/ local authority level are not published.

Income Tax

David Davis: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people employed since (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013 in (i) Haltemprice and Howden constituency, (ii) East Riding of Yorkshire and (iii) England have paid less tax as a result of changes in the personal allowance.

David Gauke: The Government increased the personal allowance for those aged under 65 years between 2010-11 and 2013-14 as shown in table 1:
	
		
			 Table 1: Personal allowance (coalition Government formed in May 2010) 
			  Personal Allowance (£) 
			 2010-11 6,475 
			 2011-12 7,475 
			 2012-13 8,105 
			 2013-14 9,440 
		
	
	By April 2013, the Government's increases in the personal allowance for those aged under 65 years (born after 5 April 1948 since 2013-14 tax year) since 2010-11 had benefited 2.02 million people in the Yorkshire and the Humber region, 21.1 million in England and 25.4 million in the UK. Most of them have benefited in all of these years.
	These estimates are based on the 2010-11 Survey of Personal Incomes, projected to 2013-14 using economic assumptions consistent with the Office for Budget Responsibility's March 2013 economic and fiscal outlook.
	Reliable estimates are not available at the parliamentary constituency or unitary authority level due to greater uncertainties in making projections for smaller geographical areas.

Natural Capital Committee

Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer on how many occasions he has met Dieter Helm in his capacity as Chair of the Natural Capital Committee since May 2010.

Nicky Morgan: Treasury Ministers and officials have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery.
	Details of ministerial and permanent secretary meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at:
	http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/minister_hospitality.htm

Wind Power: Seas and Oceans

Jonathan Edwards: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what revenue the Crown Estate receives for each (a) sea bed-fixed wind turbine and (b) floating wind turbine.

Nicky Morgan: Income received by the Crown Estate for offshore wind farms is not based on the number of turbines deployed. Instead, its income is based on either a fee per unit of electricity generated by the wind farm or a small percentage of the developer's revenue from power sales from the scheme. The exact mechanism varies depending on which Crown Estate leasing round the wind farm falls within.
	The Crown Estate currently receives no income from floating wind turbines because none have been constructed in UK waters.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Crime

Steve Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the oral evidence of Dr Rodger Patrick to the Public Administration Select Committee on 19 November 2013, HC 760, Q 2-5, what assessment she has made of the prevalence of the alleged practices of cuffing, nodding, skewing and stitching by the police to reduce the levels of recorded crime; and if she will make a statement.

Damian Green: holding answer 29 November 2013
	When it came to power in 2010, this Government moved the publication of crime statistics to the independent Office for National Statistics (ONS) to ensure independence and encourage greater trust in the figures. Since then, ONS has recognised that the-system for recording crime in England and Wales by the police is one of the best in the world, according to international standards.
	This is further supported by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary. Its 2012 report on the integrity of police crime recording found that the majority of forces were performing well against the National Crime Recording Standard.
	We are continuing to improve the quality of crime recording and build trust in national statistics. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary has an important role to ensure that this is achieved.
	Crime is falling according to both police recorded crime and the Crime Survey for England and Wales. From the year to the end of June 2013 by 5% (according to Police Recorded Crime) and by 7% (according to the Crime Survey England and Wales).

Crime

Dan Jarvis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what assessments she has made of the main root causes of crime;
	(2)  what assessments she has made of links between criminality and (a) household poverty, (b) educational attainment, (c) unemployment, (d) family environment and (e) area deprivation.

Norman Baker: holding answer 3 December 2013
	There are many drivers of crime and criminality, from harmful use of alcohol and illegal drugs, to the family and other social factors that help shape an individual's propensity to commit crime, to opportunities provided by poorly secured homes and vehicles and also the activities of organised crime groups. There is no simple link between any of these factors and overall crime in a particular area. However, there is strong evidence that effective, targeted policing can reduce crime locally.
	That is why we have removed top-down targets on the police, and introduced police and crime commissioners to ensure forces focus on the issues that matter to local people.
	The Home Office continues to lead national action to reshape our approach to alcohol, reduce illicit and harmful drug use and introduce more effective powers to nip anti-social behaviour in the bud. The National Crime Agency is also now operational and is leading, supporting and co-ordinating the law enforcement response to serious and organised crime including organised crime, cyber and economic crime, child sexual exploitation, and organised crime at, and crossing, our borders.

Members: Correspondence

Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she intends to reply to the letter to her dated 17 October 2013 from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mr K Bello.

Damian Green: I wrote to the right hon. Member on 3 December 2013.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will collate data on the number of (a) secondees from her Department to the private and voluntary sectors and trades unions; and (b) secondees to her Department from the private and voluntary sectors and trades unions.

James Brokenshire: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 3 December 2013, Official Report, columns 597-98W.

DEFENCE

Afghanistan

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 15 October 2013, Official Report, column 633W, on Afghanistan, what advances in technology have triggered reviews of UK policy on establishing positive identification and determination of status in the last two years. [R]

Philip Dunne: Regular reviews of the UK Targeting Directive and Rules of Engagement are carried out as the Afghanistan campaign has continued to evolve. Reviews within the past two years have not determined any specific advances in technology that require changes to UK policy on establishing positive identification and determination of a target's status. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Minister for the Armed Forces, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), on 15 October 2013, Official Report, column 633W, in which he states:
	“The UK meets the requirements to seek to protect civilians under International Humanitarian Law. UK policy includes robust criteria on establishing positive identification and requires commanders to do everything feasible to verify that the target is a military objective”.

Air Force: Females

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many female recruits to the RAF in each of the countries of the UK have received compensation for injuries suffered whilst participating in marching drills.

Anna Soubry: Three female RAF recruits have received common law damages for injuries suffered while participating in marching drills: all are from England. Similar information on payments under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Arms Trade

Jonathan Edwards: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost to his Department of the Export Support Team was in (a) 2010-11, (b) 2011-12 and (c) 2012-13; and whether these costs have been reimbursed by the UK Trade & Investment Defence & Security Organisation.

Philip Dunne: The cost of the Export Support Team to the Ministry of Defence was £1,571,378 in financial year (FY) 2010-11, £1,743,436 in FY 2011-12 and £1,599,488 in FY 2012-13.
	All of the above costs have been reimbursed by UK Trade and Investment Defence and Security Organisation.

Defence: Procurement

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of expenditure on his Department's procurement contracts valued in excess of £5 million was placed with small and medium-sized enterprises based in each government office region in each of the last three years.

Philip Dunne: The Ministry of Defence has not routinely produced regional expenditure statistics since 2008. It is not possible accurately to provide the proportion of expenditure of defence procurement contracts valued in excess of £5 million placed with small and medium-sized enterprises across all Government office regions without incurring disproportionate cost.

ICT

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people are employed within centralised IT departments or teams in his Department; and if he will make a statement.

Anna Soubry: It is estimated that there are some 1,625 civilian staff employed in IT roles in the Ministry of Defence. However these personnel are deployed throughout the Department rather than in specialised teams. It should also be noted that this figure may not fully capture the extent of IT skills held within the Department, as they are also relevant to roles in related professions such as engineering and project management.

National Security

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the undertaking given in the National Security Through Technology White Paper Cm 8278, paragraph 117, what steps he has taken to pursue arrangements that give his Department's supplier base greater insight into the threats and problems faced by the armed services.

Philip Dunne: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) maintains a regular dialogue with our suppliers on the key issues facing the armed forces and the wider MOD through the Defence Suppliers' Forum and its associated working groups, which includes the Research and Development Group. Alongside this, we organise regular industry briefings to ensure suppliers have an effective understanding of the requirements of the armed forces.
	The Centre for Defence Enterprise continues to provide in depth briefing to potential suppliers and two major events have been held recently in London, on 27 November 2013 concerning cyber defence and on 3 December 2013 on materials science and armour.
	The specific MOD Science and Technology requirements and investment opportunities have been explained at the annual Supplier Networking events led by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), most recently in June 2013 where more than 400 suppliers attended, and published at:
	https://www.dstl.gov.uk/suppliernetworkingday1
	The MOD uses other supplier events to outline these requirements, most recently at Defence Procurement Research Technology and Exportability in Bristol on 20 November 2013.
	Dstl works with the Technology Strategy Board's Knowledge Transfer Networks to communicate challenges and threats to the wider supplier base to stimulate their development of solutions. Dstl signed a Strategic Relationship Charter with Research Councils UK (RCUK) in January 2013 and Dstl staff are embedded in most of the Research Councils to bring greater mutual visibility to the different strands of academia and defence.

National Security

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the undertaking given in the National Security Through Technology White Paper Cm 8278, paragraph 116, whether he now publishes annually (a) his defence and security priority themes and (b) the supporting strategies for defence and security science and technology.

Philip Dunne: The National Security Through Technology White Paper (Cm 8278) set out six critical outcomes for defence, security, science and technology. These remain our overall priority.
	The Ministry of Defence publishes its Science and Technology requirements on the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) website at:
	https://www.dstl.gov.uk/whatwedo
	Further details of the science and technology requirements and the investment opportunities are presented at the annual supplier networking events led by DSTL, most recently in June 2013, where more than 400 suppliers attended. The content of the June 2013 event can be found at:
	https://www.dstl.gov.uk/suppliernetworkingday1
	Counter-terrorism priorities were published in the Contest strategy in 2011. Delivery against these priorities, which includes science and technology, is published annually in the Contest annual report to Parliament at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/contest

Pay Television

Diana Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether offices of (a) his Department and (b) its executive agencies have access to Sky Sports or an equivalent premium sports television service; and what the cost to the public purse is in each case.

Anna Soubry: The total cost in the last 12 months of Sky subscriptions for offices across the Ministry of Defence and its executive agencies that include a paid-for sports component is £2,923.20; it is not possible to isolate the specific cost of the sports component in this figure. This cost represents one subscription held by a unit within joint forces command to support one of their tasks in monitoring open source information from global 24 hour news feeds.

Travel

Chris Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost of travel within the UK was for his Department in each year since 2010; and how much of this was spent on (a) hire cars, (b) helicopter hire, (c) hotel accommodation and (d) subsistence.

Anna Soubry: This information is not held in the format requested as the Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not routinely distinguish between UK and overseas travel when accounting for the associated expenditure. I can, however, provide information on expenditure in the UK on hire cars and hotel accommodation arranged through the applicable central contract. This is set out, by financial year (FY) in the following table.
	The MOD does not hire helicopters
	
		
			 £ million 
			 Travel category (UK only) FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 
			 Hire cars (including estimated fuel costs) 20 17 18 14 
		
	
	
		
			 Hotel accommodation 31 25 26 28 
		
	
	To give context, these figures relate to approximately 230,000 military and civilian personnel in 2012-13.
	We are, under our transformational programmes, encouraging and facilitating the adoption of working practices that reduce the need to travel (such as audio and video conferencing) and have achieved a reduction of some 20% in overall travel and subsistence costs since FY 2009-10. Staff who need to travel must do so in a way that is the most economical in both cost and official time.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what support his Department provides to programmes currently being undertaken by the unmanned aerial systems industry for the development of civil use of unmanned aerial or maritime systems. [R]

Philip Dunne: The Ministry of Defence, through the Unmanned Air Systems Capability Development Centre (UASCDC), has no mandate to carry out supporting activities with civil Unmanned Air Systems (UAS) developers or operators when the applications have no defence outcomes.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

BAE Systems

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General pursuant to the answer of 11 September 2013, Official Report, column 707W, on Serious Fraud Office, whether the Director of the Serious Fraud Office has reached a decision on publication of the review carried out by Peter Mason CBE of how documents related to the BAE Systems case were sent by the Serious Fraud Office to the wrong location.

Oliver Heald: Peter Mason CBE has completed his report into this matter and made three recommendations to the Director. These are that there should be:
	Continuing ownership of the data in a concluded case by designated operational staff.
	Re-drafting of the responsibilities of the SFO's Senior Information Risk Owner.
	Raising of the profile of data handling as a key risk in the SFO's business.
	These recommendations are being implemented and Mr Mason will be invited back to the SFO in the new year to evaluate progress.
	Mr Mason found no evidence that the incorrect dispatch of material was malicious.
	It is not possible to publish the rest of the report as it contains personal data and operational information about the Serious Fraud Office.

Civil Proceedings

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General in how many civil claims against the Government the Attorney-General's Office is a respondent in (a) 2013 to date and (b) the five preceding years.

Oliver Heald: Under section 17(3) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 the Attorney-General may be nominated as a respondent to any action brought against Government where it might not be clear which is the relevant Department. The Attorney-General is also the nominal respondent in most cases brought against the Security Agencies. Litigants in person will also often make the Attorney-General respondent to a wide variety of claims whether they fall within his areas of responsibility or not. Furthermore, the Attorney-General is a necessary party to any charity proceedings, to ensure that the beneficial interest of the charity (or of charity generally) is properly represented. No central record is kept of the number of claims.

CPS Direct

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General on how many occasions police forces in England and Wales contacted CPS Direct in (a) 2012-13 and (b) each of the five preceding years.

Oliver Heald: The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the number of requests from the police for a charging decision, which were made to and answered by CPS Direct, via a telephone based system. For each valid call received a decision is made on the day to charge, not to charge or agree an action plan with the police to secure further essential information or evidence.
	The figures in the following table represent the number of calls answered in 2012-13, and in each of the five preceding years:
	
		
			  Calls answered(1) 
			 2012-13 143,614 
			 2011-12 159,242 
			 2010-11 191,392 
			 2009-10 182,113 
			 2008-09 177,373 
			 2007-08 171,426 
			 (1) The DPP's guidance on referrals changed in 2011-12 extending the circumstances in which the police could charge without reference to the CPS.

Fraud

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General 
	(1)  how many Serious Fraud Office investigations were triggered by companies self-reporting in (a) 2013 to date and (b) each of the five preceding years;
	(2)  how many Serious Fraud Office investigations were triggered by whistleblowers in (a) 2013 to date and (b) each of the five preceding years.

Oliver Heald: The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) receives a range of information and intelligence about alleged criminal actions from diverse sources. Decisions to investigate are made on the basis of all relevant material. It is not always possible or appropriate to suggest that a particular case was triggered by a single report.
	Further, given the small number and seriousness of cases investigated by SFO, it would not be desirable to provide further breakdown of this data because of the need to protect individuals and the risk of prejudicing investigations.

Fraud

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General 
	(1)  whether the Serious Fraud Office is considering or has already begun an investigation into allegations that a number of UK-based financial institutions have engaged in the manipulation of foreign exchange markets;
	(2)  whether the Director of the Serious Fraud Office has reached a decision on investigating alleged fraud against the National Health Service in the pharmaceutical sector;
	(3)  whether the Director of the Serious Fraud Office has reached a decision on investigating alleged rigging of fuel prices by fuel companies based in the UK.

Oliver Heald: The Criminal Justice Act (1987) sets out that the Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) may investigate any suspected offence which appears to him on reasonable grounds to involve serious or complex fraud. The Director may also institute and have the conduct of any criminal proceedings which appear to him to relate to such fraud.
	Section 2(a) of the Criminal Justice Act, which came into force in 2008, provides that the investigative powers of the Director are also exercisable for the purpose of enabling him to determine whether to start an investigation in a case where it appears to him that conduct to which this section applies may have taken place.
	While I accept the public interest in knowing whether or not a particular matter is being investigated, there is also a public interest in protecting the ability of the SFO to instigate those investigations without prejudice and interference. It is for this reason that it is often not possible to confirm whether a particular matter is being investigated formally by the office, or to describe any pre-investigatory activity.
	In each of these cases, I can confirm that the SFO is aware of the issues that have been raised, but it is not possible to provide a running commentary on what stage of consideration or activity they have reached.

ICT

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Attorney-General how many people are employed within centralised IT departments or teams in the Law Officers' Departments; and if he will make a statement.

Oliver Heald: There are 31 people working within the Treasury Solicitor's Department (TSol) IT department offering support to TSol and HMCPSI staff, nine of whom are civil servants and 22 of whom are working onsite as contractors who work at TSol as part of an agreed co-sourced delivery model.
	The Serious Fraud Office's (SFO) IT support is also provided partially by third parties and partially by permanent staff. There are six members of staff working in the centralised IT team. In addition to this the SFO has an IT support contract with Capita.
	Attorney-General's Office—The AGO has a contract with Capita Secure Information Solutions for IT support and has no staff employed in a centralised IT department.
	The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has a contract with CGI for IT services. This provides the vast majority of IT support to all CPS offices and is off-site. In addition there are 47 full-time CPS staff who work in some capacity on IT support roles.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Bovine Tuberculosis

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what analysis his Department has undertaken of a link between artificial insemination of cattle and the spread of bovine tuberculosis; and if he will make a statement.

George Eustice: We are aware of the debate among some veterinarians on this matter. While the evidence does not provide a definitive answer, it is important to note that TB has been eradicated from Scotland and many other countries despite the use of Artificial Insemination (AI). It is also important to note that bovine TB was already endemic throughout GB well before the widespread adoption of AI in the1950s.

Cattle

Jim Fitzpatrick: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reason his Department refused a licence for the transfer of two cattle from Stepney Urban Farm to Hillside Animal Sanctuary in Norfolk in October 2013.

George Eustice: The British Cattle Movement Service received a phone call from Stepney Urban Farm on 29 October requesting a licence to move two cattle to the Hillside Sanctuary. This was refused on 30 October, because cattle which do not comply with the cattle identification regulations are not allowed to move between holdings and may only move alive to a disposal centre. Only cattle with valid cattle passports may be moved between holdings.
	The cattle identification and tracing rules exist to underpin food safety and animal disease controls. For example, all calves must be registered with the British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS) within 27 days of birth, with the full details of the farm on which they are born, their dam’s (mother) identification, and their breed, sex and date of birth. On receipt of these details, the BCMS issues a cattle passport, which allows the animal to be freely moved and traded. These rules ensure the traceability of beef from farm to fork and were part of the package of measures introduced in response to the BSE crisis in order to lift the ban on exports of British beef in 2006.
	Passports cannot be issued for cattle which do not comply with the cattle identification regulations because they pose a risk to the food chain and increase the risks of animal disease outbreaks. Those animals may be allowed to live on the farm on which they are found, but they may not move from holding to holding, be traded, nor go into the food chain.

Discrimination

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many complaints of discrimination related to pregnancy or maternity have been lodged against employees of his Department or its executive agencies by (a) current employees and (b) prospective employees in each of the last five years; and how many such complaints resulted in disciplinary action.

Dan Rogerson: There have been five or fewer formal complaints related to pregnancy or maternity discrimination lodged against employees of core DEFRA and its Executive agencies in the last five years. The case(s) are ongoing; it is therefore not possible to state whether they may result in disciplinary action.
	There have been no formal complaints relating to pregnancy or maternity discrimination lodged against core DEFRA and its Executive agencies in the last five years by prospective employees.
	Data for the Rural Payments Agency prior to October 2012 could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Discrimination

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many complaints of disability discrimination or harassment have been lodged against employees of his Department or its executive agencies by (a) employees and (b) other individuals in each of the last five years; and how many such complaints resulted in disciplinary action.

Dan Rogerson: There were five or fewer formal complaints of disability discrimination or harassment lodged against employees of DEFRA and its Executive agencies by current employees in the last five years. No complaint resulted in disciplinary action.
	There were no formal complaints of disability discrimination or harassment lodged against employees of DEFRA and its Executive agencies by other individuals in the last five years.
	Data for the Rural Payments Agency prior to October 2012 could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Nature Conservation

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much funding his Department provides to conservation projects that aim to prevent a further decline in the (a) Asian elephant population, (b) African elephant population, (c) Asian rhinoceros population and (d) African rhinoceros population.

George Eustice: The Government has funded a wide range of projects around the world through its Darwin Initiative grants scheme, spending on which has totalled over £99 million since 1993. Through these projects, the Darwin Initiative has provided a significant contribution, both directly or indirectly, to elephant and rhino conservation.
	In addition, DEFRA has contributed almost £300,000 in the last two years (2011 and 2012) towards specific action to protect elephants and rhinos, as set out in the following table. Decisions on funding for 2013-14 will be taken shortly.
	
		
			  Purpose Amount (£) 
			 2011 Interpol's Operation Wisdom—to build enforcement capacity in African elephant and rhino range states 90,000 
			 2011 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)'s African Elephant Specialist Group 35,000 
			 2012 IUCN's African Rhino Specialist Group 50,000 
			 2012 IUCN's African Elephant Summit 50,000 
			 2012 African Elephant Fund 50,000 
		
	
	The London conference on the Illegal Wildlife Trade, which the Prime Minister will host in February 2014, will focus on how to galvanise stronger international action to protect these and other endangered species.

Nitrogen Dioxide

Barry Gardiner: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent notifications he has received from the European Commission in respect of infraction actions for breaches of nitrogen dioxide limit values.

Dan Rogerson: We have not received any notification of the Commission starting infraction proceedings against the UK for breach of the nitrogen dioxide limit values in the ambient air quality directive.

Pets: Sales

Matthew Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if his Department will take steps to enforce the Pet Advertising Advisory Group's minimum standards for advertising animals for sale online.

George Eustice: DEFRA supports the Pet Advertising Advisory Group's (PAAG) minimum standards on internet advertising of pet animals, and we hope they are adopted by as many advertisers as possible. My noble Friend Lord de Mauley, who is responsible for this area of work, has met a number of advertisers and impressed upon them the need to keep to the standards. The Government will continue to work with PAAG to monitor progress on this matter.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Credit Rating

Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether (a) he and (b) officials in his Department have received representations from individuals or organisations on the use of credit checks by companies in the recruitment process.

Michael Penning: Neither the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith), nor his office, nor officials in his Department have been officially approached by individuals or organisations on the use of credit checks by companies in the recruitment process.
	Credit checks are not part of the Department's recruitment process.

Credit Rating

Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether he plans to review what further guidance or legislation is needed to regulate the use of credit checks as part of the recruitment process by individual employers.

Esther McVey: DWP is not responsible for the guidance for or monitoring of credit checks by employers. Consumer credit regulation is transferring from the Office of Fair trading (OFT) to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) on 1 April 2014.
	Employers wishing to advertise jobs using the DWP online self-service job posting and matching service, Universal Jobmatch, must accept the Terms and Conditions for its use before a job can be posted onto the service. In accepting these Terms and Conditions, the employer agrees not to advertise jobs that include any screening requirement or criterion in connection with a job posting where such a requirement or criterion is not an actual and legal requirement of the posted job.
	An example of where such checks might be relevant may be found within the banking and financial services sector, which does request credit checks as part of the recruitment and selection process as they require applicants to have a clear credit history for these roles.

Employment

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what discussions his Department has had with the Secretary of State for Education on preparing school children for future employment.

Esther McVey: Jobcentre Plus advisers can bring a wealth of experience on local labour markets to add to the statutory provision of careers guidance by schools. Consequently, we are exploring with the Department for Education how we can deepen links between Jobcentre Plus and schools, particularly how we can facilitate bringing schools and local businesses together to support pupils in their decisions, about further education, training and the world of work.

Employment: Young People

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on what his Department plans to spend its funding allocation from the European Union Youth Employment Initiative.

Esther McVey: The Youth Employment Initiative will be implemented with other European Structural and Investment Funds as part of the European Growth Programme for England in 2014-20. The Government has asked Local Enterprise Partnerships which cover areas in England eligible for the Youth Employment Initiative to identify in their European Structural and Investment Fund strategies how this money will be used to tackle youth unemployment alongside existing Government provision.

Industrial Accidents

Dan Jarvis: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have died over the last 10 years owing to workplace accidents in (a) Barnsley Central constituency, (b) South Yorkshire and (c) England.

Michael Penning: The following table sets out relevant data on fatalities reported to the Health and Safety Executive. Data are not available by parliamentary constituency; the closest measure is for the Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (MBC) area.
	
		
			 Workplace fatal injuries, 2003-04 to 2012-13 
			  Barnsley MBC South Yorkshire England 
			  Worker Non-worker Total Worker Non-worker Total Worker Non-worker Total 
			 Total 5 2 7 44 18 62 1,552 703 2,255 
			 Note: The term 'worker' represents employees and the self-employed. The term 'non-worker' represents those persons killed through work activity, but not at work themselves, for example customers on retail premises or residents in nursing homes.

Jobseeker's Allowance

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of 18 to 24 year olds flowed off jobseeker's allowance within (a) three months, (b) six months, (c) nine months and (d) 12 months in each of the last five years.

Esther McVey: The information requested on the number of 18 to 24-year-olds, jobseeker's allowance off flows by duration can be found at:
	https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/default.asp

Social Security Benefits

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the amount of social security payments spent on repaying interest on credit.

Steve Webb: The Department for Work and Pensions does not record or have a breakdown of the amount of social security payments spent on repaying interest on credit.

Unemployment

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much EU funding has been awarded to his Department in each year since May 2010; and how much such funding was specifically for tackling (a) youth unemployment and (b) long-term unemployment.

Esther McVey: The Department for Work and Pensions is the Managing Authority for the 2007-13 European Social Fund programme in England. It allocates most of the European Social Fund money for England to other bodies, such as the Skills Funding Agency, which commission activities from providers.
	The total allocation of European Social Fund money to England in each year since 2010 is:
	
		
			  ESF allocation (€) 
			 2010 430,669,692 
			 2011 410,798,516 
			 2012 419,014,487 
			 2013 427,394,776 
			 Source: England and Gibraltar European Social Fund Convergence, Competitiveness and Employment Programme 2007-13 
		
	
	The European Social Fund supports a wide range of employment and training activities under the seven year programme which was agreed with the European Commission in 2007. The programme does not earmark funding specifically for tackling youth unemployment or long-term unemployment. However activities to tackle youth unemployment and long-term unemployment are supported within Priority 1 of the programme on 'Extending employment opportunities', along with a range of other activities to help people at a disadvantage in the labour market.

Universal Credit

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent discussions he has had with experts and charities working with victims of domestic abuse regarding alternative payment arrangements for universal credit; and what safeguards he intends to put in place for those victims of domestic abuse who do not feel able to request a split payment.

Esther McVey: The UC programme has developed alternative payment arrangements in conjunction with a wide variety of experts and stakeholders. We are continuing to work with stakeholders to look at ways to support victims of domestic violence who do not feel able to inform DWP of their situation.
	Currently, alternative payment arrangements can be requested by: the claimant, their representative or their caseworker.

Winter Fuel Payments

Dan Jarvis: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions at what level winter fuel payments were set in each category in each of the last five financial years.

Steve Webb: The information requested is in the table.
	The Government remains committed to protecting key support for older people for the life of this Parliament, in line with coalition agreement. We therefore retained the winter fuel payment amounts as budgeted for by the previous Government.
	
		
			 £ 
			  Rates 
			  Household with someone at women's State Pension age Household with someone aged 80 and over 
			 2008-09 250 400 
			 2009-10 250 400 
			 2010-11 250 400 
			 2011-12 200 300 
			 2012-13 200 300

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Coal

Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps his Department plans to take to exploit available UK coal reserves.

Michael Fallon: Coal is a flexible and reliable source of generation that Government expects will continue to play an important role over the coming years during the transition to a low-carbon economy. In the longer term, the development of cost-competitive carbon capture and storage (CCS) should ensure coal can continue as part of a decarbonised electricity sector.
	The Government has put in place a comprehensive programme of measures to bring forward a cost competitive CCS industry including a £1 billion commercialisation programme, £125 million for research and development and reform to the electricity market.
	Underground coal gasification is in its infancy, but I am keen that we create the right regulatory environment for the sector.

Energy: Prices

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what comparative assessment he has made of the differences in energy prices between the regions of the UK and the reasons for those differences.

Gregory Barker: The DECC publication Quarterly Energy Prices contains tables showing the. average unit costs and energy bills by region. The tables are available at the following link (see table 2.2.3 for electricity and table 2.3.3 for gas):
	https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/annual-domestic-energy-price-statistics
	These tables assume an annual consumption of 18,000 kWh for gas and 3,300 kWh for electricity. The latest data is for 2012 and provisional estimates for 2013 will be published on 19 December 2013.
	Network costs, which account for around 20% of a dual fuel bill, include the cost of building, maintaining and operating the local gas pipes and electricity wires and the high pressure gas and high voltage transmission networks which deliver energy directly to your home. Suppliers are charged for this service and pass on the costs to the consumer. The cost of this varies according to region, therefore the costs to the consumer will depend upon the area in which they live.

Energy: Prices

Yasmin Qureshi: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the effect of current energy prices on people over 65.

Gregory Barker: The latest data, available shows that households over 65 spent on average £21.80 per household, per week on energy bills in 2011, which is similar to the average amount spent across all households. However the average proportion of household expenditure on energy bills was higher for households over 65, at 6.5%, than across all households, at 4.6%. These figures include expenditure on electricity, gas and other household fuels, but exclude expenditure on petrol and diesel. They are based on data from the Living Costs and Food Survey, which is run by the Office for National Statistics.
	This Government has a number of policies to help those over 65 with their energy bills including the Warm Home Discount Scheme, through which well over a million of the poorest pensioners will receive £135 off their electricity bill, winter fuel payments and cold weather payments and energy efficiency policies such as the energy company obligation. In addition, the Government has recently announced proposals that will be worth £50 on average to British households, helping to reduce the impact of energy company price rises.

Fracking

Dan Jarvis: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps the Government is taking to ensure that the health and well-being of people living near fracking sites is not adversely affected by that practice.

Michael Fallon: The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering's report "Shale Gas Extraction in the UK: a review of hydraulic fracturing", published in June 2012 concluded that environmental (and health and safety) risks associated with hydraulic fracturing could be managed effectively in the UK
	“as long as operational best practices are implemented and enforced through regulation”.
	In October this year, Public Health England also published an independent report into the public health impacts of shale gas extraction. The report confirms that the potential risks to public health from exposure to emissions associated with the shale gas extraction process are low if operations are properly run and regulated.
	The Government has been clear that, wherever hydraulic fracturing is conducted, it must be done in a safe and environmentally sound way. There are regulations in place to ensure on-site safety, prevent water contamination, and mitigate air pollution and seismic activity. In addition, all onshore oil and gas projects, including shale gas, are subject to scrutiny through the planning system, which addresses impacts on local residents.

Green Deal Scheme

Jonathan Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps his Department is taking to ensure the portability of Green Deal assessments.

Gregory Barker: Green Deal Advice Reports (GDARs), which result from a Green Deal assessment, can be accessed by any provider, so long as that provider has the permission of the improver (eg the homeowner). The Green Deal Code of Practice states that providers must be prepared to use an existing GDAR for the purpose of developing a quote, unless for example, material changes have been made to the property since the original assessment was carried out. We have written to providers to remind them of this provision.

Renewable Energy: Heating

Graham Stringer: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will place in the Library a copy of the information his Department has shared with the Ground Sources Heat Pump Association relating to data arising from the metering programme of heat pumps installed under the Renewable Heat Premium Scheme; and if he will make a statement.

Gregory Barker: DECC officials have given presentations showing examples of preliminary data to the Ground-Source Heat Pump Association on a number of occasions to generate interest in the programme and receive feedback on the approach we are taking. A copy of one of the presentations is available online at:
	http://www.gshp.org.uk/Conference2012/RHPP.pdf
	Being a presentation, it needs explanation and the medium makes it unsuitable for the Libraries of the House. DECC officials will be happy to talk the member through this material as we have offered previously. No other written material showing preliminary data from the RHPP metering programme has been shared with the Ground-Source Heat Pump Association.
	It remains our intention to publish a short report showing examples of the data collected in the RHPP metering programme before we lay the domestic RHI Regulations in Parliament early in the new year, The laying of the regulations will provide an opportunity to debate the data in the report in Parliament so I will be making a statement on the issues at that time.

Warm Home Discount Scheme

Margaret Ritchie: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment his Department has made of the effect that the Warm Homes Discount scheme has had on (a) keeping older people warmer and safer during the winter months, (b) reducing levels of fuel poverty across the UK and (c) reducing excess winter deaths.

Gregory Barker: An initial impact assessment, which covered the issues raised, was undertaken before the Warm Home Discount scheme was introduced. This includes a range of relevant information to this question. It can be found at:
	www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/42590/957-ia-warm-home-discount-scheme.pdf
	In terms of keeping older people warmer and safer during winter and reducing excess winter deaths, the health benefits were not quantified in the impact assessment as there was no robust methodology. The impact assessment did, however, make assumptions based on a qualitative discussion about the likely health impacts of providing support through energy bills to those vulnerable to fuel poverty. For example, it highlighted that there is strong evidence that inadequate levels of heating and fuel poverty are linked, in particular, to respiratory problems in children and an increased risk of mortality in older adults. Low temperatures create conditions which increase the likelihood of cardiovascular events, resulting in poor physical health and in some cases death, particularly for older people. Since the Warm Home Discount enables recipients to afford adequate warmth more easily, the scheme can be assumed to improve health outcomes.
	In terms of the impact of the scheme on levels of fuel poverty, it is always difficult, under any approach to measuring this, to estimate the fuel poverty impact of an individual policy. This is because fuel poverty levels are a function of changing incomes, energy prices, and energy efficiency standards.
	The Government has decided to adopt a new definition of fuel poverty—the low income high costs indicator—and will publish a new strategy on fuel poverty in 2014. The original impact assessment presented estimates for the impact of the scheme using the previous definition of fuel poverty. Details can be found in the document linked to above.

HEALTH

Care Homes

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities are aware of their legal duties on choice of accommodation and charging for residential accommodation; if he will issue guidance to local authorities highlighting their legal obligations and setting a usual cost for purchasing care that has due regard to the actual cost of providing care locally; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  if he will issue updated guidance on choice of accommodation and charging for residential accommodation in advance of any change in the number of adults in residential care who will pay a top-up once the capped costs reforms take effect from April 2016; and if he will make a statement.

Norman Lamb: Guidance on the use of third party top up fees for local authority funded social care placements is clearly set out in Local Authority Circular LAC(2004)20. This includes guidance on the National Assistance Act 1948 (Choice of Accommodation) Directions 1992 and the National Assistance (Residential Accommodation (Additional Payments and Assessment of Resources) (Amendment) (England)) Regulations 2001. The guidance makes clear that when local authorities make placements In a care home that, within reason, individuals should be able to exercise choice over where they live. Where that accommodation is more expensive than a local authority would usually expect to pay, it sets out the responsibilities of local authorities. In particular that they:
	must never encourage or otherwise imply that care home providers can or should seek further contributions from individuals in order to meet assessed needs;
	must assure themselves that residents or third parties will have the resources to continue to make the required top-up payments; and
	that they remain liable to pay the full costs of the accommodation should either the resident or third party fail to pay the required amount.
	Following the passage of the Care Bill, updated guidance will be issued to local authorities. We anticipate consulting on this in the spring.

Family Nurse Partnership Programme: Greater London

David Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 20 March 2013, Official Report, column 711W, on Family Nurse Partnership Programme, how many first-time mothers under the age of (a) 16, (b) 18 and (c) 20 there were in each London borough in the latest period for which figures are available.

Daniel Poulter: Information available on the number of first time mothers that were under the age of 16, 18 and 20 years old in each London borough is shown in the following table. The information provided is by local authority of residence within London and the data refer to babies delivered in English national health service hospitals only.
	
		
			 A count of finished delivery episodes(1) for mothers aged under 16, under 18 and under 20(2) by local authority of residence in London, according to whether or not they had had a previous pregnancy(3) in 2011-12 
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector 
			   Under 16 years Under 18 years Under 20 years 
			  Local authority of residence code and description No previous pregnancies One or more previous pregnancy Unknown No previous pregnancies One or more previous pregnancy Unknown No previous pregnancies One or more previous pregnancy Unknown 
			 OOAA City of London — — — — — — — — — 
			 OOAB Barking and Dagenham — — * — — 48 * 8 160 
			 OOAC Barnet * — — 13 * * 69 14 10 
		
	
	
		
			 OOAD Bexley * * — 9 13 — 49 81 * 
			 OOAE Brent — * * 9 * 18 37 13 82 
			 OOAF Bromley * * * 27 * 7 74 34 17 
			 OOAG Camden — — — * * * 12 * 30 
			 OOAH Croydon 12 * * 48 14 16 115 68 45 
			 OOAJ Ealing — — * * — 18 15 * 88 
			 OOAK Enfield * ' * 23 — 29 56 7 96 
			 OOAL Greenwich * * * 28 7 * 98 52 14 
			 OOAM Hackney * — * 19 * * 76 29 8 
			 OOAN Hammersmith and Fulham — — * — — 18 — — 55 
			 OOAP Haringey — — * 10 * 29 36 9 98 
			 OOAQ Harrow * — — 9 * 6 32 10 27 
			 OOAR Havering — — — — — 27 * * 105 
			 OOAS Hillingdon * — — 16 * 6 84 31 16 
			 OOAT Hounslow * — — 26 — * 99 6 9 
			 OOAU Islington — — * 11 — * 50 * 30 
			 OOAW Kensington and Chelsea — — — — — 10 * — 27 
			 OOAX Kingston upon Thames — — — 9 * — 30 14 * 
			 OOAY Lambeth — — * * — 14 6 * 92 
			 OOAZ Lewisham — — 6 * — 37 6 * 132 
			 OOBA Merton * — * 7 * 14 19 9 51 
			 OOBB Newham * — * 27 8 * 112 45 20 
			 ODBC Redbridge * — * * * 23 11 * 79 
			 OOBD Richmond upon Thames * — — 6 * — 22 6 * 
			 OOBE Southwark — — * — — 26 — * 86 
			 OOBF Sutton * — — 20 * * 59 27 7 
			 OOBG Tower Hamlets * — — 14 * — 57 22 * 
			 OOBH Waltham Forest * * — 25 10 * 84 43 7 
			 OOBJ Wandsworth — — — * * 13 11 * 67 
			 OOBK Westminster — — * — — 14 — — 50 
			 (1) Finished Delivery Episode A finished delivery episode is a continuous period of admitted patient care within one health care provider. Episodes are counted against the year in which they end. Figures do not represent the number of different patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the same stay in hospital or in different stays in the same year. Deliveries are a subset of finished consultant episodes (FCE); a period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. (2) Age at start of episode This derived field, calculated from episode start date (epistart) and date of birth (dob), contains the patient's age in whole years (From 1 to 115 (1990-91 to 1994-95) and from 1 to 120 (1995-96 onwards)). Age groups Under 16 = 13 to 15-year-olds Under 18 = 13 to 17-year-olds Under 20 = 13 to 19-year-olds Note that these age bands are cumulative, i.e. the records in the under 16 group also appear in the under 18 and under 20 group. (3) Number of previous pregnancies This field contains the number of previous pregnancies that resulted in a registrable birth (live or still born). It appears on delivery records. Small Numbers To protect patient confidentiality, figures between one and five have been replaced with "*" (an asterisk). Where it was still possible to identify figures from the total, additional figures have been replaced with "*". The Health and Social Care Information Centre consider that because there are only between one and five people in these areas there is a risk of patient identification from releasing these data. Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Health and Social Care Information Centre

HIV Infection

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to raise the issue of HIV prevention with his European counterparts; and if he will make a statement.

Jane Ellison: The Department is working with the European Commission (EC) and member states in developing and updating the EC's Communication “Combating HIV/AIDS in the European Union and neighbouring countries 2009-2013” and accompanying action plan. HIV prevention is one of the six themes included in the action plan.

In Vitro Fertilisation

Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the specific hurdles are that were described by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in its statement on 19 September 2013 regarding the recent science paper Mitochondrial replacement, evolution, and the clinic; and what assessment he has made of the validity of the conclusion in that paper to monitor fertility and health outcomes through to sexual maturity among the macaques already born after maternal spindle transfer.

Jane Ellison: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the hurdles referred to are outlined in section 3, Further Research, of the March 2013 report of the expert panel, co-ordinated by the authority, on the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial donation techniques. The report can be found on the HFEA's website at:
	www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/Mito-Annex_VIII-science_review_update.pdf
	The Government and the HFEA will have regard to the views of the expert panel in respect of any follow up studies on macaques. Paragraph 2.28 of the March 2013 report outlines the panel's views on using the macaque model.
	The Government intends to assess the situation further following consultation on the draft regulations to enable mitochondrial donation techniques to be used in treatment in the United Kingdom.

Mental Illness: Employment

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many and what proportion of adults on the Care Programme Approach who were receiving secondary mental health services were in employment in (a) England (b) each mental health trust, (c) each primary care trust, (d) each clinical commissioning group and (e) each local authority area in each of the last five years;
	(2)  how many and what proportion of adults receiving secondary mental health services were in employment in (a) England, (b) each mental health trust, (c) each primary care trust, (d) each clinical commissioning group and (e) each local authority area in each of the last five years.

Norman Lamb: Information is available for the proportion of adults receiving secondary mental health services on the care programme approach (CPA) in employment, and for those receiving secondary mental health services in employment by mental health trust, NHS Commissioner and local authority area. Data at clinical commissioning group level is not available.
	The most recently published annual data available from the Health and Social Care Information Centre is for 2012/13. This information has been placed in the Library.
	The title of the documents are as follows:
	
		
			 Adults on care programme approach receiving secondary mental health services in employment by provider 2008-13 
			 Title Table 
			 Proportion of adults on CPA receiving secondary mental health services in employment by mental health provider, 2008/09-2012/13 Table la 
			 Proportion of adults on CPA receiving secondary mental health services in employment by NHS commissioner, 2008/09-2012/13 Table lb 
			 Proportion of adults on CPA receiving secondary mental health services in employment by local authority, 2008/09-2012/13 Table lc 
		
	
	
		
			 Adults receiving secondary mental health services in employment by provider 2008-13 
			 Title Table 
			 Proportion of adults receiving secondary mental health services in employment by mental health provider, 2008/09-2012/13 Table la 
			 Proportion of adults receiving secondary mental health services in employment by NHS commissioner, 2008/09-2012/13 Table lb 
			 Proportion of adults receiving secondary mental health services in employment by local authority, 2008/09-2012/13 Table lc

NHS: Temporary Employment

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been spent on (a) locums, (b) agency nurses and (c) other temporary workers in the NHS (i) in England, (ii) in each hospital trust, (iii) by each community health service and (iv) in each mental health trust in each of the last five years.

Daniel Poulter: We do not collect data on how much has been spent on non NHS staff (agency etc.) in the categories requested. Tables for 2008-09 to 2011-12(1, 2) which show spending by NHS trusts on non NHS staff which categorises nurses, midwives, health visitors and others have been placed in the Library. As part of our efforts to reduce the burden of data requested from NHS trusts, this information is no longer collected.
	(1 )The data held by the Department cannot be disaggregated to show expenditure specifically in respect of locums or agency nurses. The figures provided under the category of “Agency Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting Staff” include staff costs of midwives and health visiting staff. The figures provided under the category of total non NHS staff costs do not include locums, except where the payment is to an employment agency. This includes spending with NHS Professionals.
	(2) NHS Foundation Trusts are included in the data in the years before and, where appropriate, the part of the year in which they achieved foundation status.

Pupils: Bullying

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Education on the potential negative health effects of homophobic bullying in schools; and if he will make a statement.

Norman Lamb: There have been no formal discussions between the Secretary of State for Health and the Secretary of State for Education on the potential negative health effects of homophobic bullying in schools.
	The Government do not want any young person to go to school dreading the treatment they will get. It is never acceptable for a child to be bullied, victimised or harmed in any way. It can have a devastating effect on self-esteem, health and learning outcomes.
	All schools, including academies, should have a behaviour policy. This should contain measures to prevent all forms of bullying, including bullying based on prejudice against any particular groups, on the grounds of, for example, race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Schools are free to develop their own anti-bullying measures and are held to account by Ofsted for their effectiveness in managing pupil behaviour. The Department for Education's advice includes signposts to organisations, such as Stonewall, EACH and School's Out, where schools can access specialist information and advice on dealing with issues such as homophobic bullying.

JUSTICE

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Luciana Berger: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Witham of 3 June 2013, Official Report, column 923W, on alcoholic drinks: young people, how many people were convicted of buying alcohol on behalf of a minor in (a) 2012 and (b) 2013 to date.

Jeremy Wright: 11 offenders were found guilty at all courts of buying alcohol on behalf of a minor in England and Wales, in 2012 (the latest available).
	Information on court proceedings in 2013 is planned for publication in spring 2014.

Charitable Donations

David Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps his Department is taking to encourage employees to make tax-free donations direct from their salaries.

Shailesh Vara: The Ministry of Justice (including its agencies) has systems in place that allow all employees to donate via payroll giving through the 'Give As You Earn Scheme' in which they can choose to set up a charity account or direct donation. Information on the 'Give as you Earn Scheme' is available on our internal intranet.
	The Ministry of Justice supports the Government's commitment to raise awareness and we will take action on promoting payroll giving more regularly to employees in 2014.

Magistrates Courts: Wales

Peter Hain: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the cost of moving Neath and Port Talbot magistrates' courts into the local county court (a) in total and (b) by category of expenditure;
	(2)  what estimate he has made of the transition cost of merging Neath, Port Talbot and Swansea magistrates' courts in (a) the first year and (b) subsequent years;
	(3)  what the operating costs of Neath and Port Talbot Magistrates' Court are each year (a) in total, (b) for staffing, (c) for property, (d) for utilities and (e) for other categories;
	(4)  what estimate he has made of potential savings in annual operating costs from a merger of Neath, Port Talbot and Swansea magistrates' courts (a) in total and (b) by category of expenditure;
	(5)  what the net present value is of the potential savings from the proposed merger of Neath, Port Talbot and Swansea magistrates' courts (a) in total and (b) by category of expenditure.

Shailesh Vara: The information is as follows:
	(1) There is no estimate of the cost of moving Neath magistrates court into the local county court.
	(2) The impact assessment published alongside the consultation set out that, in present value terms, the estimate of the transition costs are £231,000 in the first year only.
	(3) During 2012-13 approximately (a) £620,000 (b) £310,000 (c) £50,000 in fixed costs (business rates and service charges) (d) £20,000 (e) £240,000 was spent operating Neath magistrates court.
	(4) The ongoing economic benefits total £110,000 per year (excluding optimism bias) from lower operating facility costs ie utilities, cleaning, waste disposal, security and maintenance. This consists annually of (a) £0 in staff savings (all staff are expected to transfer) (b) £50,000 in savings on fixed costs (business rates and service charges); £5,000 in utilities savings; and £55,000 in other savings (security, cleaning, etc.). All figures exclude optimism bias.
	(5) The impact assessment published alongside the consultation paper set out that the best estimated NPV is £1.27 million from benefits of £1.75 million and economic costs of £483,000. All figures include optimism bias. Over the five year appraisal horizon, the benefits consist of £1.11 million in maintenance savings; £400,000 in operating cost savings; £150,000 for the value of the court; £90,000 from the regeneration benefits to the town. All figures in NPV terms and include optimism bias.

Prison Sentences

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 5 September 2013, Official Report, column 519W, on prison sentences, what offences were committed in each such case.

Jeremy Wright: The information requested is provided in table A as follows.
	Overall the proportion of pre-sentence reports proposing immediate custodial sentences at the Crown court has increased, which is in line with an increase in the proportion of offenders given immediate custody.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
	
		
			 Table A: PSR reports recommending an immediate custodial sentence in the Crown court, by offence group and sex, 2010 to 2012(1) England and Wales 
			  2010 2011 2012 
			 Males and Females 11,701 11,512 11,467 
			 Percentage:    
			 Violence against the person 24 24 22 
			 Sexual offences 12 14 14 
			 Robbery 14 14 14 
			 Burglary 14 13 14 
			 Theft and handling 4 4 4 
			 Fraud and forgery 2 2 1 
			 Criminal damage 2 2 3 
			 Indictable motoring offences 1 1 1 
			 Other indictable offences 23 22 23 
			 Summary motoring offences 0 0 0 
			 Other summary offences 3 3 4 
			 Not recorded 0 0 0 
			 Males 11,125 10,868 10,804 
			 Percentage:    
			 Violence against the person 24 23 22 
			 Sexual offences 13 15 14 
			 Robbery 14 15 14 
			 Burglary 14 13 15 
			 Theft and handling 4 3 4 
			 Fraud and forgery 2 2 1 
			 Criminal damage 2 2 2 
			 Indictable motoring offences 1 1 1 
			 Other indictable offences 22 22 23 
			 Summary motoring offences 0 0 0 
			 Other summary offences 3 3 3 
			 Not recorded 0 0 0 
			 Females 576 644 663 
			 Percentage:    
			 Violence against the person 27 25 25 
			 Sexual offences 3 2 4 
			 Robbery 12 13 14 
			 Burglary 9 7 8 
			 Theft and handling 7 8 8 
			 Fraud and forgery 4 4 5 
		
	
	
		
			 Criminal damage 5 7 6 
			 Indictable motoring offences 0 0 0 
			 Other indictable offences 28 27 25 
			 Summary motoring offences 0 0 0 
			 Other summary offences 4 5 4 
			 Not recorded 0 0 1 
			 (1) From April 2012, there was a change to the court report data collection process. Data Sources and Quality: These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Prisoners

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many prisoners in each prison in England and Wales are originally from London;
	(2)  what the most recent figures are for the number of prisoners from London in each prison in England and Wales.

Jeremy Wright: The table shows the number of male and female prisoners held in a prison, young offender institution and female prison with a recorded residential address in a London local authority area on 30 September 2013.
	If no address is given, an offender's committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. These figures are included in the answer. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 3% of all offenders, these figures are excluded from the answer. Information on offenders' residences is provided by them on reception in prison and recorded on a central IT system. Addresses can include a home address, an address to which offenders intend to return on discharge or next of kin address and these figures are provided in the table.
	
		
			 Prison in England and Wales where prisoners originally from London are held on 30 September 2013 
			 Prison Total 
			 Altcourse 8 
			 Ashfield 54 
			 Askham Grange 4 
			 Aylesbury 197 
			 Bedford 57 
			 Belmarsh 667 
			 Birmingham 19 
			 Blantyre House 58 
			 Blundeston 84 
			 Brinsford 8 
			 Bristol 19 
			 Brixton 645 
			 Bronzefield 195 
		
	
	
		
			 Buckley Hall 7 
			 Bullingdon 120 
			 Bure 151 
			 Cardiff 11 
			 Channings Wood 27 
			 Chelmsford 90 
			 Coldingley 224 
			 Cookham Wood 49 
			 Dartmoor 36 
			 Deerbolt 1 
			 Doncaster 4 
			 Dorchester 7 
			 Dovegate 55 
			 Downview 87 
			 Drake Hall 19 
			 Durham 4 
			 East Sutton Park 30 
			 Eastwood Park 2 
			 Elmley (Sheppey) 171 
			 Erlestoke 54 
			 Everthorpe 3 
			 Exeter 9 
			 Featherstone 23 
			 Feltham 545 
			 Ford 239 
			 Foston Hall 10 
			 Frankland 134 
			 Full Sutton 123 
			 Garth 36 
			 Gartree 138 
			 Glen Parva 95 
			 Grendon/Spring Hill 166 
			 Guys Marsh 76 
			 Hatfield 4 
			 Haverigg 5 
			 Hewell 12 
			 High Down 622 
			 Highpoint 801 
			 Hindley 1 
			 Hollesley Bay 189 
			 Holloway 327 
			 Holme House 12 
			 Hull 20 
			 Huntercombe 204 
			 Isis 563 
			 Isle of Wight 261 
			 Kennet 4 
			 Kirkham 19 
			 Kirklevington Grange 6 
			 Lancaster Farms 5 
			 Leeds 3 
			 Leicester 7 
			 Lewes 46 
			 Leyhill 44 
			 Lincoln 34 
			 Lindholme 12 
			 Littlehey 345 
			 Liverpool 9 
			 Long Lartin 123 
			 Low Newton 4 
		
	
	
		
			 Lowdham Grange 187 
			 Maidstone 249 
			 Manchester 16 
			 Moorland 35 
			 Mount 459 
			 New Hall 3 
			 North Sea Camp 52 
			 Northumberland 24 
			 Norwich 74 
			 Nottingham 21 
			 Oakwood 77 
			 Onley 208 
			 Parc 23 
			 Pentonville 1,117 
			 Peterborough (Female) 8 
			 Peterborough (Male) 42 
			 Portland 47 
			 Prescoed 6 
			 Preston 4 
			 Ranby 69 
			 Reading 17 
			 Risley 13 
			 Rochester 244 
			 Rye Hill 200 
			 Send 103 
			 Stafford 13 
			 Standford Hill (Sheppey) 242 
			 Stocken 88 
			 Stoke Heath 7 
			 Styal 10 
			 Sudbury 30 
			 Swalesidc (Sheppey) 595 
			 Swinfen Hall 71 
			 Thameside 800 
			 Thorn Cross 7 
			 Usk/Prescoed 14 
			 Verne 93 
			 Wakefield 92 
			 Wandsworth 964 
			 Warren Hill 57 
			 Wayland 529 
			 Wealstun 2 
			 Werrington 6 
			 Wetherby 12 
			 Whatton 60 
			 Whitemoor 216 
			 Winchester 48 
			 Wolds 10 
			 Woodhill 73 
			 Wormwood Scrubs 1,052 
			 Wymott 12 
			 Total 16,844 
		
	
	One of the key aspects of this Government's Transforming Rehabilitation proposals, as announced by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), in July, is a nationwide "through the prison gate" resettlement service to progress adult male offenders seamlessly from custody into the community.
	From 2015, the overwhelming majority of prisoners will be released from one of their home area's designated resettlement prisons with a package of support to reduce the risk of reoffending.

Prisoners: Children

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many prisoners have given birth during each of the last five years;
	(2)  how many children under 18 months old were living with their mothers in prison during each of the last five years;
	(3)  how many children of women prisoners were removed from their care on reaching the age of 18 months during each of the last five years.

Jeremy Wright: Information on the number of women who have given birth in prison is not collected centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	PQ 177909
	
		
			 Table 1: The number of babies living in Mother and Baby units at the end of September 2010, 2011 and 2012 
			  Number 
			 September 2010 52 
			 September 2011 43 
			 September 2012 43 
			 September 2013 30 
			 Notes: 1. This information is collected as a snapshot the end of each month. It is not possible to identify individuals and as a result it is possible that babies could appear in more than one snapshot. 2. The age of the baby is not collected and therefore could include babies older than 18 months. 
		
	
	This central data collection was started in April 2010 and therefore data for the five year period requested is not available.
	PQ 177910
	
		
			 Table 2: The total number of discharges of babies from Mother and Baby units on separation for 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 
			  Number 
			 2010-11 3 
			 2011-12 5 
			 2012-13 9 
			 Notes: 1. This information is not at the individual level and therefore individual cases could appear more than once. 2. The age of the baby is not collected and therefore the age of the baby at time of separation can not be derived. 
		
	
	These figures do not include cases where mothers and babies are separated when the mother is received into prison. Only separations that occur while the mother and baby are in the Mother and Baby Unit are counted.
	This central data collection was started in April 2010 and therefore data for the full five year period requested is not available.
	The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) provides places in Mother and Baby Units when it is considered in the child's best interests. There are currently six Mother and Baby Units in women's prisons in England (there are no women's prisons located in Wales). These are located at Styal, New Hall, Eastwood Park, Askham Grange, Peterborough and Bronzefield.
	Prison Service Instruction 54/2011, which deals with the Management of Mother and Baby Units, provides instruction and guidance to managers and staff who work in them and is also available to prisoners.

Prisoners: Risk Assessment

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoner risk assessments were carried out in each month in (a) 2012 and (b) 2013 to date.

Jeremy Wright: This information is not held centrally. In order to provide the information, each prison and probation trust would need to manually check several local systems for each reception and discharge in the requested time period. This exercise could be completed only at disproportionate cost.
	All prisoners arriving into an establishment, whether new to custody or new to an establishment, are provided with an appropriate level of care and support. Immediate needs are identified, addressed (where possible) and recorded to enable continuity of monitoring, signposting and support. Furthermore, prisoners are treated decently, and safer custody issues, including cell sharing risks, are given priority. Therefore all prisons are required to conduct initial assessments of prisoners on their entry to the prison, as set out in Prison Service Instruction 74/2011; Early Days in Custody—Reception In, First Night in Custody, and Induction to Custody. These would include assessments of the prisoner's physical and mental health, the risk of harm (including self-harm) to the prisoner and others, any immediate personal needs and also security issues in relation to the possible risk posed to prison security or the general public.
	Prisoners leaving custody, whether transferring to another prison, being moved into the custody of another agency, or being released, their safety and well being requires that any existing support and care plans are maintained in the new environment. Relevant agencies are informed about a prisoner's physical and mental health needs and risks of harm. Prison Service Instruction 72/2011; Discharge sets out the procedures to follow at point of discharge.

Prisons

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much the Ministry of Justice spent (a) in total, (b) as a share of the total prison budget and (c) as a share of the Department's total budget operating (i) privately-run and (ii) publicly-run prisons in (A) 2010, (B) 2011 and (C) 2012; and how much this is expected to be in (1) 2013, (2) 2014 and (3) 2015.

Jeremy Wright: The following table shows the share of the total net prison resource expenditure broken down by public sector and publicly-run prisons against the Ministry of Justice's departmental total net resource expenditure for financial years 2010-11 to 2012-13.
	Financial year 2013-14
	Please note that the allocated budgets for 2013-14 may be subject to change during the financial year. Due to changes in priorities, scope and accounting treatment the figures may not be directly comparable.
	Financial years 2014-15 and 2015-16
	The budgets for 2014-15 and 2015-16 will be set as part of the Departments regular annual budget allocation process. Allocations will be made on the basis of need and according to departmental priorities.
	
		
			 Overall net resource 
			 Expenditure on public and private prisons Public sector prisons Contracted prisons Total prisons MOJ total and prison share (net) 
			 2012-13     
			 Expenditure (£ million) 2,487.418 471.864 2,959.282 8,382.203 
			 Share of costs (percentage) 84 16 100 35.3 
			 Share of MOJ net expenditure (percentage) 30 6 35  
			      
			 2011-12     
			 Expenditure (£ million) 2,602.154 382.653 2,984.807 8,683.607 
			 Share of costs (percentage) 87 13 100 34.4 
			 Share of MOJ net expenditure (percentage) 30 4 34  
			      
			 2010-11     
			 Expenditure (£ million) 2,753.859 344.975 3,098.834 9,230.638 
			 Share of costs (percentage) 89 11 100 33.6 
			 Share of MOJ net expenditure (percentage) 30 4 34  
			 Notes: 1. The out-turn figures on prisons are based on published data in the Management Information Addendum to the NOMS accounts. The MOJ expenditure is from the published MOJ annual report and accounts. 2. The above figures are produced on as comparable a basis as possible, so they include all direct expenditure at prisons, plus expenditure met at a regional and national level. 3. The prisons figures are based on the NOMS' Net Operating Costs as per the CSoCNE in the annual accounts. Expenditure not related to prisons (such as probation) and extraordinary expenditure (eg impairments) are not included. MOJ expenditure is net operating costs from the departmental CSoCNE. 4. The private prisons figure for 2012-13 includes Oakwood, Thameside and the full-year effect of Birmingham. It also includes some start-up costs of the new prisons. 5. The private prisons figure for 2011-12 includes half-year operating costs of Birmingham, which went into private management (operated by G4S) in October 2011. 6. The reduction in public prisons' share of expenditure reflects this increase at private prisons and is also a result of the programme of prison closures and efficiency savings that has taken place. There was an average increase in prisoner places in privately-run prisons by 1,382 in 2011-12 from 2010-11; and a further increase of 1,711 in 2012-13 from 2011-12. 7. Care must be taken in considering the comparison between private and public sector costs for the following reasons: (a) The public and private groups of prisons are not homogenous groups in terms of prison category, size, or age and these factors may have a greater impact on average costs than whether the prisons are public or private sector. (b) The private sector contracts may have different responsibilities for provision of health or education services than public sector prisons. This will affect their relative costs. (c) The different financing methods of PFI prisons mean that in an individual year the resource costs of private and public sector prisons are not directly comparable. (d) The costs are based on resource expenditure recorded in NOMS annual accounts. The PFI prisons are on balance sheet, which means that the element of the private contractors’ charges related to the capital cost is not included in the unit costs, while depreciation of buildings is included. Following government accounting rules, the charge against the resource budget is not calculated in the same way. (e) The PFI prisons costs include a charge for interest on capital costs. There is no equivalent charge in the public sector costs.

Prisons: Private Sector

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will list all occasions on which performance points were accrued by private prisons since 2010; for what reason the points were accrued in each case; and what financial penalties were attached in each case.

Jeremy Wright: Performance points accrued, reasons for performance points accrual and financial remedies applied for quarterly measured and annually measured performance points at private prisons for contract periods 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are detailed in tables 1 to 3. Please note that quarterly and annual performance measures are calculated on differing criteria and are not comparable.
	Note: performance points and financial remedies criteria will vary from contract to contract, particularly between PFI and Manage and Maintain Contracts, as well as newer, amended and older PFI contracts. For example, actual performance measures, method of calculation, performance point weightings, credit point weightings, performance point targets etc. may vary from contract to contract.
	The data presented in tables 1 to 3 is based on total number of performance points accrued for the relevant periods. This does not take into account credit points awarded to contractors and offset against total performance points for the period. Financial remedies are only applicable when performance point baseline targets are exceeded for the period.
	Due to a changeover in systems in 2012-13, some financial data reported for previous periods are incomplete.
	Performance points are essentially about operational efficiency, and do not represent a risk to public safety.
	
		
			 Table 1: 2010-11 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 70 (6)— 5 (6)— 130 (6)— 5 (6)— 257 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 509 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 660 (6)— 
			  Total 80 0 5 0 160 46,503 15 0 1,426 97,497 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 20 (6)— 50 (6)— 10 (6)— 55 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 164 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 20 30,000 50 0 10 13,881 55 4,119 164 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 65 (6)— 185 (6)— 20 (6)— 130 (6)— 75 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 112.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 15 (6)— 135 (6)— 
			  Total 65 0 200 —(5) 30 0 145 (5)— 322.5 (5)— 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 170 (6)— 150 (6)— 250 (6)— 60 (6)— 192.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 110 (6)— 0 (6)— 5 (6)— 5 (6)— 418 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 280 —(5) 150 0 255 —(5) 65 0 610.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 0 (6)— 5 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 
			  Incidents 40 (6)— 0 (6)— 50 (6)— 110 (6)— 82 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Total 40 400 5 2,635 50 0 140 —(5) 132 0 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 25 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 30 (6)— 20 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 45 0 30 0 55 0 30 0 0 (5)— 
			             
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 70 (6)— 60 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 289 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 20 0 40 0 70 0 349 32,947 
		
	
	
		
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 170 (6)— 85 (6)— 235 (6)— 100 (6)— 526 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 255 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 65 (6)— 
			  Total 170 10,708 85 0 245 21,595 120 3,795 846 72,525 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 35 (6)— 35 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 35 0 35 0 40 0 20 0 0 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 30 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 65 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 10 (6)— 455 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 15 0 40 0 20 0 10 0 520 0 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 70 (6)— 55 (6)— 60 (6)— 200 (6)— 81.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 50 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 22 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 62.5 (6)— 
			  Total 70 0 105 0 60 0 200 5,174 166 0 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: 2011-12 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 100 (6)— 0 (6)— 62 (6)— 
			  Incidents 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 80 (6)— 60 (6)— 481 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 30 0 40 0 180 0 60 0 543 —(5) 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 10 (6)— 35 (6)— 10 (6)— 100 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 150 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 10 0 35 0 10 0 250 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 65 (6)— 30 (6)— 125 (6)— 50 (6)— 145 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 119.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 25 (6)— 35 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 25 (6)— 
			  Total 90 —(5) 65 0 150 —(5) 65 0 289.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 110 (6)— 155 (6)— 130 (6)— 35 (6)— 251.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 5 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 30 (6)— 40 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 399 (6)— 
			  Total 150 0 200 —(5) 150 0 35 0 690.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 90 (6)— 10 (6)— 5 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Incidents 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 20 (6)— 10 (6)— 217 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 
			  Total 130 13,882 30 0 25 0 20 0 267 —(5) 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 40 (6)— 65 (6)— 210 (6)— 105 (6)— 26 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 70 (6)— 30 (6)— 11 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 70 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 110 0 105 0 280 —(5) 135 0 37 0 
			             
		
	
	
		
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 85 (6)— 65 (6)— 45 (6)— 55 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 214 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 65 0 45 0 55 0 254 10,566 
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 200 (6)— 370 (6)— 115 (6)— 590 (6)— 341 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 296 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 195 (6)— 
			  Total 210 5,681 370 23,760 135 0 590 57,796 832 78,223 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 120 (6)— 125 (6)— 290 (6)— 115 (6)— 99 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 120 0 125 0 290 20,188 115 0 99 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 75 (6)— 10 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 30 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total 85 0 40 0 (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 80 (6)— 80 (6)— 50 (6)— 100 (6)— 131 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 50 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 45 (6)— 
			  Total 80 0 80 0 50 0 110 0 226 1,370 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 3: 2012-13 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 205 (6)— 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 50 (6)— 92 (6)— 
			  Incidents 20 (6)— 60 (6)— 50 (6)— 30 (6)— 529 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 225 35,168 75 0 60 0 80 0 621 28,740 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 60 (6)— 70 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 25 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 185 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 70 0 0 0 20 0 185 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 120 (6)— 80 (6)— 70 (6)— 35 (6)— 110 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 93.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 25 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 415 (6)— 
			  Total 145 16,478 95 4,580 85 2,169 50 0 618.5 78,504 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 115 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 121 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 15 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 125 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 115 1,360 55 0 20 0 0 0 246 0 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 35 (6)— 5 (6)— 5 (6)— 35 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 20 (6)— 112 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 35 0 35 0 25 0 167 6,889 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 65 (6)— 5 (6)— 200 (6)— 27 (6)— 
		
	
	
		
			  Incidents 60 (6)— 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 60 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 75 0 85 0 45 0 260 16,519 27 0 
			             
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 85 (6)— 35 (6)— 10 (6)— 40 (6)— 80 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 35 0 20 0 40 0 80 0 
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 730 (6)— 295 (6)— 200 (6)— 105 (6)— 288 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 275 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 60 (6)— 
			  Total 730 99,775 295 32,005 200 16,961 115 5,059 623 57,607 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 135 (6)— 105 (6)— 50 (6)— 70 (6)— 198 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 135 0 105 0 50 0 90 0 198 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 0 (6)— 0 (6)— — (6)— — (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— — (6)— — (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 13 (6)— 3 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total 0 0 0 0 13 5,672 3 1,260 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 125 (6)— 455 (6)— 455 (6)— 220 (6)— 203 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 13 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Total 125 583 455 24,657 495 27,648 240 9,075 236 4,279 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 7 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 0 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 90 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 97 45,299 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
		
	
	
		
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 66 (6)— 86 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 0 (6)— 255 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 55 (6)— 79 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 121 263 420 28,253 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 135 (6)— 
			  Total (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 135 95,135 
			 (1) Total points accrued. Note: data excludes credit points awarded. Financial penalties only apply if baseline targets exceeded. (2) Periods relate to contractual periods not financial periods. (3) Prison not in operational service. (4) Performance measure not applicable. (5) No data. (6) Indicates brace.

Prisons: Private Sector

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when the contract for each privately run prison in England and Wales was signed; when each such contract began; when each such contract expires; and what the annual cost of each such contract (a) has been to date and (b) will be throughout its duration.

Jeremy Wright: Please refer to the following table which sets out the requested information for each privately run prison in England and Wales. It is not possible to provide the annual costs of each contract in previous years or in future years due to several factors, i.e.
	the management of these prisons in most cases has changed from one Government Department to another and the annual cost information for individual establishments has not always been passed onto the new Government Department.
	also these contracts are subject to annual indexation and from time to time variations occur which either increase or decrease the cost of the establishments concerned.
	As such it is almost impossible to estimate what the final cost for each establishment might be over its contract term. In consequence we have indicated the original estimated cost for each establishment and the term of each contract.
	
		
			 Specific data relating to private prison contracts 
			 Existing contracted estate prisons Type of contract Signed date Actual contractual opening date Contract end date (or as amended) Contract duration/term (years) Approx. total contract value(£ million)(1) Certified normal accommodation (CNA)(2) 
			 HMP Altcourse PFI 20 December 1995 1 December 1997 30 May 2023 25 919 780 
			 HMP Ashfield PFI 1 July 1998 1 November 1999 31 October 2024 25 658 400 
			 HMP Birmingham M&M 13 April 2011 1 October 2011 30 September 2026 15 453 1,093 
			 HMP Bronzefield PFI 20 December 2002 17 June 2004 16 June 2029 25 757 470 
			 HMP Doncaster M&M 13 April 2011 1 October 2011 30 September 2026 15 368 743 
			 HMP Dovegate PFI 27 September 1999 9 July 2001 8 July 2026 25 782 1,060 
			 HMP Forest Bank PFI 6 July 1998 20 January 2000 19 January 2025 25 659 1,064 
			 HMP Lowdham Grange PFI 7 November 1996 16 February 1998 15 February 2023 25 484 888 
			 HMP Oakwood M&M 13 April 2011 24 April 2012 23 April 2027 15 349 1,605 
			 HMP Pare PFI 4 January 1996 15 December 1997 14 December 2022 25 880 1,170 
			 HMP Peterborough PFI 14 February 2003 28 March 2005 27 March 2030 25 918 840 
		
	
	
		
			 HMP Rye Hill PFI 23 July 1999 21 January 2001 20 January 2026 25 549 600 
			 HMP Thameside (formally Belmarsh West) PFI 30 June 2010 30 March 2012(4) 31 December 2036 25 931 600 
			 HMP Wolds(3) MT 5 January 2003 5 January 2003 30 June 2013 10 90 320 
			 (1) Original Treasury or MOJ projection. (2) These figures vary from time to time. (3) This contract has expired and returned to the public sector July 2013. (4) Fully open (CFOD) 1 June 2012. Notes: 1. Key to contract types: PFI = Private Finance Initiative M&M = Manage and Maintain MT = Market Test 2. The “Approx. total contract value” varies from prison to prison due to many different factors, e.g. when the prison was competed, the cost from the contractor concerned, the footprint and land area of the prison, its prisoner capacity. PFI contracts tend to be more expensive since the contractor had to build the prison in the first place. M&M and MT prisons are less expensive due to having shorter terms, etc. 3. Care must be taken in considering the comparison between private and public sector costs for the following reasons: a) The public and private groups of prisons are not homogenous groups in terms of prison category, size, or age and these factors may have a greater impact on average costs than whether the prisons are public or private sector. b) The private sector contracts may have different responsibilities for provision of health or education services than public sector prisons. This will affect their relative costs. c) The different financing methods of PFI prisons mean that in an individual year the resource costs of private and public sector prisons are not directly comparable. d) The costs are based on resource expenditure recorded in NOMS Annual Accounts. The PFI prisons are on balance sheet, which means that the element of the private contractors' charges related to the capital cost is not included in the unit costs, while depreciation of buildings is included. Following government accounting rules, the charge against the resource budget is not calculated in the same way. e) The PFI prisons costs include a charge for interest on capital costs. There is no equivalent charge in the public sector costs.

Prisons: Private Sector

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what financial penalties for what reasons have been imposed on each operator of privately run prisons in England and Wales since May 2010.

Jeremy Wright: Performance points accrued, reasons for performance points accrual and financial remedies applied for quarterly measured and annually measured performance points at private prisons for contract periods 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are detailed in tables 1 to 3. Please note that quarterly and annual performance measures are calculated on differing criteria and are not comparable.
	It is not possible to specify data from May 2010 as performance reporting is based on quarterly and annual submissions in line with contract-specific timelines.
	Note: performance points and financial remedies criteria will vary from contract to contract, particularly between PFI and Manage and Maintain Contracts, as well as newer, amended and older PFT contracts. For example, actual performance measures, method of calculation, performance point weightings, credit point weightings, performance point targets etc. may vary from contract to contract.
	The data presented in tables 1 to 3 is based on total number of performance points accrued for the relevant periods. This does not take into account credit points awarded to contractors and offset against total performance points for the period. Financial remedies are only applicable when performance point baseline targets are exceeded for the period.
	Due to a changeover in systems in 2012-13, some financial data reported for previous periods are incomplete.
	It is important to note that performance points are essentially about operational efficiency, and do not represent a risk to public safety. At no point has public safety been at risk. There are no significant historical trends in the attached figures. Privately managed prisons achieve the majority of their contractual targets with proportionately low levels of performance points and financial remedies applied as a result. The data for each contract is closely monitored by MOJ staff and any emerging or sustained performance failures are discussed in detail with the relevant provider in order to rectify performance shortfalls as quickly as possible.
	
		
			 Table 1: 2010-11 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 70 (6)— 5 (6)— 130 (6)— 5 (6)— 257 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 509 (6)— 
		
	
	
		
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 660 (6)— 
			  Total 80 0 5 0 160 46,503 15 0 1,426 97,497 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 20 (6)— 50 (6)— 10 (6)— 55 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 164 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 20 30,000 50 0 10 13,881 55 4,119 164 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 65 (6)— 185 (6)— 20 (6)— 130 (6)— 75 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 112.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 15 (6)— 135 (6)— 
			  Total 65 0 200 —(5) 30 0 145 (5)— 322.5 (5)— 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 170 (6)— 150 (6)— 250 (6)— 60 (6)— 192.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 110 (6)— 0 (6)— 5 (6)— 5 (6)— 418 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 280 —(5) 150 0 255 —(5) 65 0 610.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 0 (6)— 5 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 
			  Incidents 40 (6)— 0 (6)— 50 (6)— 110 (6)— 82 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Total 40 400 5 2,635 50 0 140 —(5) 132 0 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 25 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 30 (6)— 20 (6)— 30 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 45 0 30 0 55 0 30 0 0 (5)— 
			             
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 70 (6)— 60 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 289 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 20 0 40 0 70 0 349 32,947 
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 170 (6)— 85 (6)— 235 (6)— 100 (6)— 526 (6)— 
		
	
	
		
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 255 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 65 (6)— 
			  Total 170 10,708 85 0 245 21,595 120 3,795 846 72,525 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 35 (6)— 35 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 35 0 35 0 40 0 20 0 0 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 30 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 65 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 10 (6)— 455 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 15 0 40 0 20 0 10 0 520 0 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 70 (6)— 55 (6)— 60 (6)— 200 (6)— 81.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 50 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 22 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 62.5 (6)— 
			  Total 70 0 105 0 60 0 200 5,174 166 0 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: 2011-12 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 100 (6)— 0 (6)— 62 (6)— 
			  Incidents 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 80 (6)— 60 (6)— 481 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 30 0 40 0 180 0 60 0 543 —(5) 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 10 (6)— 35 (6)— 10 (6)— 100 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 150 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 10 0 35 0 10 0 250 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 65 (6)— 30 (6)— 125 (6)— 50 (6)— 145 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 119.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 25 (6)— 35 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 25 (6)— 
			  Total 90 —(5) 65 0 150 —(5) 65 0 289.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 110 (6)— 155 (6)— 130 (6)— 35 (6)— 251.5 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 5 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 30 (6)— 40 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 399 (6)— 
			  Total 150 0 200 —(5) 150 0 35 0 690.5 —(5) 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 90 (6)— 10 (6)— 5 (6)— 10 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Incidents 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 20 (6)— 10 (6)— 217 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 
			  Total 130 13,882 30 0 25 0 20 0 267 —(5) 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 40 (6)— 65 (6)— 210 (6)— 105 (6)— 26 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 70 (6)— 30 (6)— 11 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 70 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 110 0 105 0 280 —(5) 135 0 37 0 
			             
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 85 (6)— 65 (6)— 45 (6)— 55 (6)— 40 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 214 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 65 0 45 0 55 0 254 10,566 
		
	
	
		
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 200 (6)— 370 (6)— 115 (6)— 590 (6)— 341 (6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 296 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 195 (6)— 
			  Total 210 5,681 370 23,760 135 0 590 57,796 832 78,223 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 120 (6)— 125 (6)— 290 (6)— 115 (6)— 99 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 120 0 125 0 290 20,188 115 0 99 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 75 (6)— 10 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents 10 (6)— 30 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total 85 0 40 0 (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 80 (6)— 80 (6)— 50 (6)— 100 (6)— 131 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 50 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 45 (6)— 
			  Total 80 0 80 0 50 0 110 0 226 1,370 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 3: 2012-13 
			   Q1(2) Q2(2) Q3(2) Q4(2) Annual(2) 
			   Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) Points(1) Value (£) 
			 Altcourse Failure to comply with procedures 205 (6)— 15 (6)— 10 (6)— 50 (6)— 92 (6)— 
			  Incidents 20 (6)— 60 (6)— 50 (6)— 30 (6)— 529 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 225 35,168 75 0 60 0 80 0 621 28,740 
			             
			 Forest Bank Failure to comply with procedures 60 (6)— 70 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents 25 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 185 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 70 0 0 0 20 0 185 0 
			             
			 Bronzefield Failure to comply with procedures 120 (6)— 80 (6)— 70 (6)— 35 (6)— 110 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 93.5 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 25 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 15 (6)— 415 (6)— 
			  Total 145 16,478 95 4,580 85 2,169 50 0 618.5 78,504 
			             
			 Peterborough Failure to comply with procedures 115 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 121 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 15 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 125 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 115 1,360 55 0 20 0 0 0 246 0 
			             
			 Ashfield—YJB Failure to comply with procedures 10 (6)— 35 (6)— 5 (6)— 5 (6)— 35 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 30 (6)— 20 (6)— 112 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Total 10 0 35 0 35 0 25 0 167 6,889 
			             
			 Parc—Part YJB Failure to comply with procedures 15 (6)— 65 (6)— 5 (6)— 200 (6)— 27 (6)— 
			  Incidents 60 (6)— 20 (6)— 40 (6)— 60 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 75 0 85 0 45 0 260 16,519 27 0 
			             
		
	
	
		
			 Dovegate Failure to comply with procedures 85 (6)— 35 (6)— 10 (6)— 40 (6)— 80 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 85 0 35 0 20 0 40 0 80 0 
			             
			 Rye Hill Failure to comply with procedures 730 (6)— 295 (6)— 200 (6)— 105 (6)— 288 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 (6)— 275 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 60 (6)— 
			  Total 730 99,775 295 32,005 200 16,961 115 5,059 623 57,607 
			             
			 Lowdham Grange Failure to comply with procedures 135 (6)— 105 (6)— 50 (6)— 70 (6)— 198 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Total 135 0 105 0 50 0 90 0 198 0 
			             
			 Doncaster Failure to comply with procedures 0 (6)— 0 (6)— — (6)— — (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— — (6)— — (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 13 (6)— 3 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total 0 0 0 0 13 5,672 3 1,260 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Wolds Failure to comply with procedures 125 (6)— 455 (6)— 455 (6)— 220 (6)— 203 (6)— 
			  Incidents 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 40 (6)— 20 (6)— 13 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 20 (6)— 
			  Total 125 583 455 24,657 495 27,648 240 9,075 236 4,279 
			             
			 Oakwood Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 7 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 0 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 90 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 97 45,299 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			             
			 Thameside Failure to comply with procedures (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 66 (6)— 86 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Incidents (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 0 (6)— 255 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 55 (6)— 79 (6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 
			  Total (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— (3,6)— 121 263 420 28,253 (4,6)— (4,6)— 
		
	
	
		
			             
			 Birmingham Failure to comply with procedures (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Incidents (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 0 (6)— 
			  Failure to comply with prison regime (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 135 (6)— 
			  Total (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— (4,6)— 135 95,135 
			 (1) Total points accrued. Note: data excludes credit points awarded. Financial penalties only apply if baseline targets exceeded. (2) Periods relate to contractual periods not financial periods. (3) Prison not in operational service. (4) Performance measure not applicable. (5) No data. (6) Indicates brace.

Reoffenders

Stephen Gilbert: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  what the rate of reoffending was for all 18 to 21 year olds released from young offender institutions in each of the last five years;
	(2)  what the rate of reoffending was for all adults released from full adult prisons in each of the last five years.

Jeremy Wright: Most young adults (over 18 and under 21 years old) who are held in custody are accommodated in young offender institutions. Young offender institutions are either single or dual designated as both a prison and a young offender institution. Reoffending statistics are collected for each establishment. We cannot separate reoffending rates for dual designated institutions so cannot enable direct comparisons.
	Statistics on proven reoffending are published by the Ministry of Justice on a quarterly basis in the ‘Proven Re-offending Statistics Quarterly Bulletin’ at the following link:
	www.gov.uk/government/publications/proven-re-offending-quarterly-january-to-december-2011
	Proven reoffending rates for adult offenders in England and Wales who were released from adult prison and young offender institutions, can be found in Table 22a (less than 12 month sentences) and b (12 months or more sentences) of the Proven Re-offending Statistics Quarterly Bulletin, January to December 2011.
	A proven re-offence is defined as any offence committed in a one year follow-up period resulting in a court conviction, caution, reprimand or warning in the one year follow-up. Following this one year follow-up, a further six month waiting period is allowed for the offence to be proven in court.
	Reoffending rates for young adults remain stubbornly high. The Government published the Transforming Management of Young Adults in Custody consultation document on 7 November to outline plans to introduce a fresh approach.

Sentencing

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average proportion of determinate sentences actually served in custody by (a) men and (b) women was in the latest period for which figures are available.

Jeremy Wright: The legislation governing standard determinate sentences provides for automatic release at the halfway point with the second half of the sentence served in the community. The Government has introduced extended determinate sentences for dangerous offenders which provide for at least two thirds of the custodial term to be served in custody, with extended periods served on licence on release. It is also legislating to ensure that all sentenced prisoners will be released on licence and subject to supervision for at least 12 months. The Government has also announced plans to end automatic release from prison for offenders who receive standard determinate sentences for certain serious child sex offences and terrorist offences.
	Some offenders may serve more than half of their custodial term in prison if they have received added days as a consequence of disciplinary proceedings in prison. Some offenders may be released earlier than the halfway point on home detention curfew (HDC). A greater proportion of female offenders are eligible for HDC because, generally, the offences they have committed are less serious and therefore the length of sentences they receive are shorter than those received by male offenders.
	The information requested is contained in table 3.2 of the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly bulletin:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/253958/discharge-tables-q2-2013.xls
	This shows that for quarter ending June 2013, the percentage of time served, including remand, for all determinate sentences was 52%—52% for males and 48% for females.

Sexual Offences: Prosecutions

Elfyn Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  what proportion of children prosecuted for sexual offences plead guilty;
	(2)  what proportion of adults prosecuted for sexual offences plead guilty.

Jeremy Wright: Our laws in these areas are robust and clear. The Government takes very seriously all matters relating to sexual abuse and also any material which may appear to be derived from or to encourage such activity.
	The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales, This database holds information on offences provided by the statutes under which proceedings are brought but not the specific circumstances of each case. Plea data for cases heard entirely at the magistrates courts is not centrally held.
	The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts, and the number of defendants tried at the Crown court, by plea, for sexual offences, by age group, in England and Wales, in 2012 (the latest available) can be viewed in the following table.
	Court proceedings for the calendar year 2013 are planned for publication in May 2014.
	
		
			 Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates' courts01, and number of defendants tried at the Crown Court, by plea, for sexual offences, by age group, England and Wales, 2012<2,(3) 
			 Age group Proceeded against Tried at the Crown court Of which: Pleaded guilty Proportion of Crown court trials where defendants pleaded guilty (%) 
			 Aged 10 to 17 672 200 86 43.0 
			 Aged 18 and over 8,741 6,258 2,409 38.5 
			 (1) Plea data for magistrates court not available. (2) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe. (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services—Ministry of Justice

Television: Data Protection

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what discussions he has had with television manufacturers on the collection and transmission of private and personal data gathered by smart TVs.

Shailesh Vara: Ministry of Justice Ministers have not had any discussions with television manufacturers on the collection and transmission of private and personal data gathered by smart televisions. The Government takes both the protection of personal data and the right to privacy extremely seriously.
	However, the Information Commissioner's Office, as the independent body set up to enforce the Data Protection Act, would be best placed to investigate these matters.

EDUCATION

Charitable Donations

David Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps his Department is taking to encourage its employees to make tax-free donations direct from their salaries.

Elizabeth Truss: The Department for Education runs a charitable giving scheme, which enables employees to give tax-free donations to a charity or charities of their choice through the payroll system. Information on the scheme is available to all employees through the Department's intranet.

Children: Day Care

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what estimate he has made of how many childcare places need to be created by September 2014 to fulfill the Government's commitment to extend the offer of free childcare to disadvantaged two year olds.

Elizabeth Truss: Since 1 September 2013 local authorities have been under a statutory duty to secure a place for any eligible two-year-old. Around 92,000 two-year-olds are already accessing a place—70% of the way towards the 130,000 places planned for the first year.
	The entitlement will be extended to around 260,000 children from September 2014, which equates to 130,000 full-time places. The last Department for Education Childcare and Early Years Providers Survey reported that there were around 300,000 early years vacancies.
	The Government is putting in place a number of measures to support growth in provision across the country including:
	1. creating new childminder agencies
	2. making it easier for schools to take two-year-olds and to offer out-of-school-hours facilities
	3. simplifying the regulatory framework and planning rules so nurseries can expand more easily
	4. improving the funding system to increase consistency across local authorities and maximise the funding that reaches the frontline.
	The Government has also provided £100 million capital funding to support a growth in high quality places and will continue to monitor take-up closely.

Children: Protection

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will request that Ofsted provides detailed calculations as to why the response from Sir Michael Wilshaw dated 7 November 2013 and deposited in the Library indicates that providing significant incident notifications can only be done at disproportionate cost.

David Laws: Ofsted is a separate independent non-ministerial Government Department. However, Sir Michael Wilshaw has now commented further on the question of costs to the Procedure Committee, explaining the basis for his response. A copy of his letter has been placed in the House Library.

Kings Science Academy

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for Education pursuant to the answer of 22 November 2013, Official Report, column 1090W, on Kings Science Academy, (a) what the critical information supplied to Action Fraud was and (b) what other information was requested by Action Fraud.

Edward Timpson: All the critical information in the Education Funding Agency's report, including the detail and value of the invoices which were believed to have been fabricated, was supplied to Action Fraud.
	Action Fraud asked a series of questions, such as how much money had been paid to the academy, all of which were answered.

Ofsted

David Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what advice he has given to Ofsted on a potential conflict of interest on the part of those overseeing the organisation who are also members of academy chains; and if he will make a statement.

David Laws: Ofsted's published corporate governance framework sets out clear expectations for members of the board, including requirements to abide by the principles of public life, to register interests that are or may be perceived as being relevant or material to the business of Ofsted, and to disclose personal interests. Where a board member has a prejudicial interest in any business of Ofsted they must withdraw from all involvement in discussions and decisions relating to that business.
	The separation of powers between the Ofsted board and Her Majesty's chief inspector ensures that neither the Chair, nor individual members, have any influence over specific inspection judgments.

Primary Education: Croydon

Steve Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will provide additional funding for new primary school places in the London borough of Croydon; and if he will make a statement.

David Laws: Since 2011, we have allocated over £95.3 million of basic need funding to Croydon to help the local authority create additional school places, including just under £63.3 million for the financial years 2013-15. Croydon's pupils will also benefit from £48.7 million invested through the Targeted Basic Need programme, which will support the local authority to build five new schools and expand three existing schools, creating a total of 4,090 new places.
	This brings the total funding allocated for new school places during the period 2011-15 to £144 million, compared to £17.7 million provided to Croydon during 2007-11. Three new free schools due to open in 2014 will also provide an additional 2,410 school places in the area.
	We have improved the way that basic need funding is, allocated, to target money at the areas that need new school places the most. We have secured a good settlement for the next spending period and expect to announce further funding shortly.

Pupils: Bullying

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps he is taking to support Stonewall's Education for All campaign to prevent and tackle homophobic bullying in schools and colleges in England; and if he will make a statement.

Elizabeth Truss: The Secretary of State for Education, my right hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove), is a public supporter of the excellent work that Stonewall does to campaign against homophobic bullying in schools. He spoke at their annual Education for All Conference in July 2013, condemning the pejorative use of the word 'gay' in schools.
	The Department for Education's guidance to schools makes it clear that tackling bullying, including homophobic bullying, is a top priority for this Government and should never be tolerated. All schools must have a behaviour policy with measures to prevent bullying, including bullying based on prejudice against any particular groups, on the grounds of, for example, race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. It is up to schools to develop their own specific strategies to prevent bullying, as they are best placed to do so in the context of their pupils' needs. Ofsted holds schools to account for their effectiveness at preventing bullying.
	Our advice to schools on prevention and tackling bullying includes signposts to organisations such as Stonewall, Educational Action Challenging Homophobia (EACH) and School's Out, where schools can access specialist information and advice on dealing with issues such as homophobic bullying. The Department will continue to work closely with these organisations, including Stonewall, to ensure that our bullying advice is up-to-date.
	We are also supporting a piece of work at the Government Equalities Office, on homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying in secondary schools. This will involve a review of evidence and practices currently in place in schools to tackle homophobic bullying.

Schools

Andy Sawford: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many schools moved from a three tier to a two tier system during 2012-13; how many schools are committed to making such a change during 2013-14; and how many schools are engaged in consultations concerning the possibility of making this change at some point in the future.

David Laws: The information requested could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	We are unable to comment on the number of schools that are currently consulting on the possibility of making such a reorganisation of their educational provision in the future. This is because local authorities and schools are able to consult and engage with their local communities on this issue without first notifying the Department.

Schools: Bradford

George Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many existing schools in the Bradford Education Authority area are planning to meet increased demand for school places by increasing their current capacity.

David Laws: The Department for Education collects information from each authority on school capacity in state-funded primary and secondary schools (except special schools) through the annual School Capacity Collection in the academic year of the survey. The Department has not previously collected information from local authorities on the number of schools that are planning to meet increased demand for school places by increasing their current capacity. This information has been collected for the 2013 survey and will be available in the next quarter.

Schools: Greater London

Steve Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what funding his Department has provided to (a) open new secondary schools, (b) expand existing secondary schools, (c) open new primary schools and (d) expand existing primary schools in London in the most recent 12 months for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

David Laws: For the period 2011-15, we have allocated £1,632 million to London local authorities, to create new school places where they are most needed. Local authorities use this funding to expand existing primary and secondary schools, and to open new schools.
	During this period, we have also allocated £306 million to London local authorities through the Targeted Basic Need programme. This programme alone will create around 26,574 new places in London by September 2015.
	In total over the current spending review period, we have allocated £1,938 million to London local authorities, more than three times the £619 million in the preceding four-year period under the previous Government.

Special Educational Needs

Stephen McCabe: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many special needs schools for (a) two to nine year olds, (b) nine to 16 year olds and (c) over 16 year olds were in operation in each of the last six years.

Edward Timpson: The Department does not hold this information for all the age ranges specified and also does not hold this information on a historical basis.
	Currently there are a total of 1,548 special schools in England. The numbers of special schools with a statutory age range within age ranges two to nine, nine to 16, two to 16 and two to over 16 are given as follows. A further table showing the number of special schools for other statutory age ranges is also given.
	
		
			 Schools for two to nine-year-olds 
			 Statutory age range Number of special schools(1) 
			 2 to 5 1 
			 2 to 6 2 
			 2 to 7 1 
			 3 to 5 2 
			 Total 6 
		
	
	
		
			 Schools for nine to 16-year-olds 
			 Statutory age range Number of special schools(1) 
			 9 to 16 12 
			 10 to 16 19 
		
	
	
		
			 11 to 14 1 
			 11 to 16 201 
			 12 to 16 4 
			 13 to 16 5 
			 14 to 16 17 
			 15 to 16 1 
			 Total 260 
		
	
	
		
			 Schools for over 16-year-olds 
			 Statutory age range Number of special schools(1) 
			 16 to 19 1 
			 Total 1 
		
	
	
		
			 Schools where the age range spans two or more of the defined categories 
			 Statutory age range Number of special schools(1) 
			 0 to 11 1 
			 0 to 12 1 
			 1 to 18 1 
			 2 to 11 68 
			 2 to 12 5 
			 2 to 14 3 
			 2 to 16 16 
			 2 to 17 4 
			 2 to 18 5 
			 2 to 19 166 
			 3 to 11 38 
			 3 to 14 1 
			 3 to 16 15 
			 3 to 18 7 
			 3 to 19 110 
			 4 to 11 40 
			 4 to 12 3 
			 4 to 13 1 
			 4 to 16 37 
			 4 to 17 1 
			 4 to 18 7 
			 4 to 19 44 
			 5 to 11 31 
			 5 to 12 12 
			 5 to 13 2 
			 5 to 14 9 
			 5 to 16 46 
			 5 to 17 3 
			 5 to 18 7 
			 5 to 19 54 
			 6 to 10 1 
			 6 to 11 3 
			 6 to 12 1 
			 6 to 13 3 
			 6 to 16 13 
			 6 to 17 1 
			 6 to 18 2 
			 6 to 19 9 
			 7 to 11 6 
			 7 to 12 1 
			 7 to 13 4 
			 7 to 14 5 
			 7 to 15 1 
			 7 to 16 47 
			 7 to 17 5 
			 7 to 18 19 
		
	
	
		
			 7 to 19 32 
			 7 to 22 1 
			 8 to 16 23 
			 8 to 17 5 
			 8 to 18 15 
			 8 to 19 26 
			 9 to 17 3 
			 9 to 18 6 
			 9 to 19 14 
			 10 to 17 3 
			 10 to 18 34 
			 10 to 19 12 
			 10 to 23 1 
			 11 to 17 19 
			 11 to 18 57 
			 11 to 19 144 
			 12 to 17 4 
			 12 to 18 . 6 
			 12 to 19 4 
			 13 to 17 :2 
			 13 to 18 2 
			 13 to 19 4 
			 14 to 17 2 
			 14 to 19 1 
			 14 to 25 2 
			 Total 1,281 
			 (1) Includes Academy Special Converter; Academy Special Sponsor Led; Community Special School; Foundation Special School; Free Schools Special; Non-Maintained Special School and Other Independent Special School. Source: EduBase 30 November 2013

Teachers: Training

George Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proportion of trainee teachers in (a) the School Direct programme and (b) tertiary institutions are disabled.

David Laws: Provisional data on new entrants to initial teacher training programmes in the academic year 2013/14 was collected as part of initial teacher training census. The disability statistics were not included in the published data, but are as follows:
	1. 6% of new entrants on School Direct (Fee) programmes have a declared disability, and 4% of new entrants on a School Direct (Salary) programme have a declared disability.
	2. 7% of new entrants on a Provider led(1) programme have a declared disability.
	(1)Note:
	Provider led includes University and School-centred initial teacher training providers.

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Betting Shops

Yasmin Qureshi: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what steps he is taking to prevent the proliferation of betting shops near areas with high levels of deprivation;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the effect of recent changes to permitted development rights on the number of betting shops on the high street.

Nicholas Boles: Local authorities already have a range of powers available in regard to betting shops.
	Where there are permitted development rights to allow change of use, a local planning authority can consult on and make an article 4 direction to require a planning application to be submitted where it is necessary to protect local amenity. These powers are well known to local authorities, and some have chosen to take forward an article 4 direction in regard to betting shops. For example, the London borough of Barking and Dagenham has been consulting on an article 4 direction and associated supplementary planning guidance to address the proliferation of betting shops in the local area.
	A betting shop must comply with its licensing conditions, and where they are breached the local licensing authority has powers to intervene including removing the licence to operate.

Council Housing: Waiting Lists

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many people are on the housing waiting list; and how many such people have been on the list for over two years in (a) Southampton City Council area, (b) Havant Borough Council area, (c) Fareham Borough Council area and (d) Gosport Borough Council area.

Kris Hopkins: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 2 December 2013, Official Report, column 554W.

Families: Disadvantaged

Steve Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 25 November 2013, Official Report, column 82W, on disadvantaged families, what payments have been made to each local authority listed in the table referred to in the answer from the troubled families budget since the start of that programme; and if he will make a statement.

Kris Hopkins: holding answer 2 December 2013
	The details of all payments made to local authorities on the Troubled Families programme are published as part of DCLG's transparency data. Our approach to transparency is explained here:
	https://www.gov.uk/search?tab=government-results&q=dclg+transparency
	For payments relating to the results paid in September 2013, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254351/TP_DCLG_September_2013_for_Publication.xls
	(click on Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).
	For payments relating to the attachment fee payments made in August 2013, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/245298/TP_DCLG_August_2013_for_publication.xls
	(scroll down to Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).
	For payments relating to attachment fees and Troubled Families Co-ordinator payments made in June 2013, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225554/TP_DCLG_June_2013_for_publication.xls
	(click on Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).
	For payments relating to the results paid in March 2013, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/222112/TP_DCLG_March_2013_for_publication.xls
	(click on Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).
	For payments relating to the attachment fee and Troubled Families Co-ordinator payments made in July 2012, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7548/2215991.xls
	(click on Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).
	For payments relating to the attachment fee and Troubled Families Co-ordinator payments made in May 2012, these can be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5806/2169202.xls
	(click on Troubled Families under the Expenses Area heading).

Fire Services: Cleveland

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 25 November 2013, Official Report, column 83W, where details of meetings that may have been held between officials in his Department and representatives of Cleveland Fire Authority have been published.

Brandon Lewis: Ministerial meetings with external organisations are published on my Department's website.
	Departmental officials meet with representatives from local fire and rescue authorities from time to time on a range of matters. As was the case under the last Administration, details of such informal meetings by officials are not routinely published.
	More broadly, I refer the hon. Member to my speech in the Adjournment debate, at which he attended, of 13 May 2013, Official Report, columns 470-76, which sets out the Government's position on mutuals very clearly.

Homelessness

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many night shelters there were in each of the last 10 years.

Kris Hopkins: The information requested is not centrally held.

London Finance Commission

Andy Sawford: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the London Finance Commission's report, Raising the Capital, published May 2013;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the conclusions of the recently published report of the London Finance Commission entitled Raising the Capital; and if he will make a statement.

Brandon Lewis: We welcome the report's contribution to the ongoing public debate on the scope for further decentralisation.
	Notwithstanding, as I outlined in my evidence to the Communities and Local Government Select Committee on 24 June (HC 213), we have no current plans to transfer more powers to the Greater London Authority, given we have recently just devolved a range of responsibilities and funding through the Localism Act 2011 and decentralised local government finance through the Local Government Finance Act 2012.
	Decentralisation should be to the lowest appropriate level-not just to the Greater London Authority, but also down to London boroughs, parishes and neighbourhoods, community groups and local residents.

New Towns

Emma Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  with reference to the Government's Housing Strategy launched in November 2011, what the outcome was of the competition to promote the development of a wave of larger-scale housing projects;
	(2)  what recent discussions (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department have had with (i) Ministers and (ii) officials in other Government departments on garden cities;
	(3)  what recent (a) discussions and (b) meetings (i) Ministers and (ii) officials in his Department have had with stakeholders regarding garden cities;
	(4)  how many meetings (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department have had with (i) Ministers and (ii) officials in other Government departments regarding garden cities;
	(5)  how many meetings (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department have had with third parties regarding garden cities.

Kris Hopkins: I refer the hon. Member to my answer to her of 25 November 2013, Official Report, column 84-5W, which outlines how the Government is supporting locally-led development, in contrast to the last Administration's failed eco-town programme and top-down regional strategies.
	Ministers and officials have regular discussions with colleagues from other Government Departments on a range of matters. Ministerial meetings with external organisations are routinely published on my Department's website.
	Representatives of the Department routinely meet a range of interested parties with involvement in locally-led large-scale development, including schemes bidding for support through the Local Infrastructure Fund.

Planning Permission: Hillingdon

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what recent representations his Department has received from the London Borough of Hillingdon about delays by the Planning Inspectorate in determining appeals within that borough.

Nicholas Boles: Neither my Department nor the Planning Inspectorate have received any such representations.

Written Questions

Emma Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to what proportion of named day questions his Department provided a substantive reply by the named day in each year since 2005.

Brandon Lewis: Information from departmental records on the numbers of named day parliamentary questions answered by the Department tabled in each year since 2005 is as follows:
	
		
			  Named day questions Number answered on time Percentage answered on time 
			 2005 493 371 75 
			 2006 543 315 58 
			 2007 681 335 49 
			 2008 791 538 68 
			 2009 862 708 82 
			 2010 733 621 85 
			 2011 614 440 72 
			 2012 700 485 69 
			 Total 5,417 3,813 70

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Tuberculosis

Virendra Sharma: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment she has made of trends in global incidence of tuberculosis.

Lynne Featherstone: The World Health Organisation estimates that 8.6 million people developed tuberculosis (TB) in 2012. TB cases have been falling worldwide for a decade; however the rate of decline is slow. Resistance to TB drugs is a growing threat and there is a risk of resurgence.

Central African Republic

Frank Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment she has made of the humanitarian situation in the Central African Republic.

Lynne Featherstone: The humanitarian situation in the Central African Republic (CAR) is acute. The UN estimates the whole population (4.6 million people) is affected by this conflict and 1.6 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. A DFID team returned from an assessment mission over the weekend. The International Development Secretary announced on 29 November a £10 million package for CAR to meet unmet humanitarian needs.

Yemen

Andrew Bridgen: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment her Department has made of the performance of its programmes in Yemen.

Alan Duncan: Six of the eight Yemen projects reviewed in the last twelve months met or exceeded their targets. Results achieved as a direct result of British aid over the last year include providing 480,000 people with emergency food aid and 165,000 people with access to clean drinking water.

Aid Dependency

Michael Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment she has made of her Department's effectiveness in promoting economic development in developing nations as a means of ending dependency aid.

Justine Greening: We know that economic development is essential for sustained poverty reduction. Growth reduces poverty through job creation and raised incomes. It also raises tax revenues which allow governments to deliver improved public services such as health and education, and ultimately graduate from aid.

Sierra Leone

Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps she is taking to improve governance in Sierra Leone.

Lynne Featherstone: Improving governance is a top priority in our aid programme in Sierra Leone. We are helping improve transparency and accountability, strengthening justice and democracy, and working to stamp out corruption.

Kenya

Julian Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what work her Department is undertaking in Kenya.

Lynne Featherstone: DFID’s work in Kenya supports Kenya’s own development blueprint, Vision 2030, focusing in three areas (i) promoting stability and security (ii) stimulating economic growth, creating jobs to reduce poverty and aid dependency; and (iii) improving service delivery including humanitarian support.

Development: Business Engagement

Karl McCartney: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps her Department is taking to engage UK businesses in international development.

Justine Greening: DFID works with businesses to promote growth and reduce poverty in developing countries. I regularly meet UK businesses to discuss the contribution they can make. I recently visited Tanzania with representatives from British companies already investing there or exploring investment opportunities with an impact on poverty.

Bedouin

Grahame Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps her Department is taking to meet the humanitarian needs of Bedouin who are forcibly removed from their traditional lands.

Alan Duncan: The UK Government has raised concerns about forced relocation of Bedouin with the Israeli authorities, with a view to agreeing a satisfactory solution to this complex issue. DFID supports vulnerable communities including the Bedouin in the Occupied Palestinian Territories to reduce their risk of displacement.

ICT

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many people are employed within centralised IT departments or teams in her Department; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Duncan: There are 119 employees within DFID's central IT department.

Palestinians

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what projects were funded by the Conflict Pool in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories in (a) 2010, (b) 2011 and (c) 2012.

Hugh Robertson: I have been asked to reply 
	on behalf of the Department for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
	In the financial year 2009-10 we funded 20 projects through the Conflict Pool in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, costing £3,966,639; in 2010-2011 we funded 16 projects costing £3,486,373; in 2011-2012 we funded 22 projects costing £3,137,012; in 2012-2013 we funded 14 projects costing £3,624,641.

Philippines

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how the Government aid to the Philippines will be distributed; and how this aid will be monitored to ensure that it reaches those most in need.

Justine Greening: The British Government has committed more than £50 million to assist with disaster relief efforts currently underway in the Philippines. UK funding is provided through international aid partners and organisations that have demonstrated the ability to deliver aid effectively to those in need. This includes British charities, the United Nations, and the Red Cross Movement.
	My Department has a team working in the Philippines. Agencies receiving UK funds will be closely monitored by officials. We require regular reporting by recipient organisations and my officials will visit projects at key points during implementation.

Philippines

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what comparative information her Department holds on donations made by other member states of the EU towards alleviating suffering as a result of Typhoon Haiyan.

Justine Greening: The UK, and all EU member states, are required to input financial information relating to humanitarian responses through the EU's European Emergency Disaster Response Information System. This in turn informs the global humanitarian Financial Tracking Service overseen by the UN. The information held in both of these systems is available for the public to access at:
	https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/hac/
	and
	http://fts.unocha.org/

BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Engineering: Skilled Workers

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what assessment his Department has made of the skills shortages in the engineering industry; and what recent discussions he has held with education leaders and employers on this matter.

Matthew Hancock: The Government fully recognises the importance of the supply of skilled engineers to the country's current and future economic performance. On 4 November, my Department published a Review of Engineering Skills by the BIS Chief Scientific Adviser, Professor John Perkins. Professor Perkins' assessment is that it would benefit the economy to substantially increase the supply of engineers entering the labour market and identified a number of practical measures to improve that supply. As part of the Government's response to the Perkins review, we will provide up to £30 million for proposals from employers to develop engineering skills in sectors suffering acute shortages.
	In developing his review, Professor Perkins consulted a wide range of stakeholders including employers, educators and professional bodies. I and my colleagues frequently meet education leaders and employers on this matter, including this week.
	Education and Skills are devolved matters and the recommendations in the review apply to England, although the improvement to engineering skills should benefit employers across the UK.

Higher Education: Private Sector

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will stop the recruitment of students for higher national diploma and higher national certificate courses by private colleges for the remainder of 2013-14; and if he will make a statement.

David Willetts: As I announced in my written statement of 19 November 2013, Official Report, column 43WS, 'Student Support in England' we have taken action to deal with those providers who have undertaken aggressive recruitment in 2013/14 in advance of formal number controls coming into force. HNCs/HNDs are valuable qualifications but, in order to manage their growth, my officials have written to the 23 alternative providers that are expanding most rapidly to instruct them to recruit no more HNC/HND students for 2013/14. All other alternative providers are free to continue to recruit students to all courses designated for student support for the remainder of the 2013/14 academic year provided that the number of students they recruit does not exceed their planned recruitment as notified to HEFCE. This includes HNDs and HNCs.

Higher Education: Private Sector

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will place controls on the number of students enrolling for higher learning qualifications at private colleges.

David Willetts: We announced in March 2013 that full-time student number controls would apply to alternative higher education providers from the 2014/15 academic year. In the announcement we stated that the controlled numbers would be based on recruitment in 2012/13. As I announced in my written statement of 19 November 2013, Official Report, column 43WS, 'Student Support in England' we have taken action to deal with those providers who have undertaken rapid expansion in 2013/14 in advance of formal number controls coming into force.

Higher Education: Private Sector

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the number of students expected to enrol on courses at private colleges awarding higher national diplomas and certificates in (a) 2014-15, (b) 2015-16 and (c) 2016-17.

David Willetts: We have made no estimate of the number of students expected to enrol on HND and HNC courses that are designated for student support at private providers. Higher education institutions are autonomous; we do not specify the number of students they may recruit to a particular qualification aim. Alternative providers will be expected to recruit no more students to their courses than the student number controls that will be placed upon them from 2014/15 onwards, and may recruit no more HNC/HND students in 2013/14 than previously notified to HEFCE.

New Businesses: Cumbria

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many start up loans have been granted to businesses in (a) Westmorland and Lonsdale constituency and (b) Cumbria in the last five years.

Matthew Hancock: We do not hold data on the number of start up loans granted to businesses by constituency area.
	From the data available, the following are drawn down loans:
	Cumbria: 22 loans with a total value of £168,700 since the start of the scheme in September 2012.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Burma

Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what pre-conditions he has set before the UK will provide training to the Burmese Army.

Hugo Swire: The Burmese military remain a core political force in Burma and will be key to the process of political reform. It will only be through engagement with all actors, including the military, that we will see greater democracy in Burma. The focus of our defence engagement in Burma will be on adherence to the core principles of democratic accountability, international law and human rights.
	As part of this policy of engagement, in January 2014 a civil-military team from the Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, in collaboration with Cranfield University, will deliver a tailored version of the Managing Defence in a Wider Security Context course in Burma to 30 students, drawn from government and the Burmese military. The course will educate participants on effective governance and management in support of a civilian government within a democratic framework. The programme will also include an examination of the legal framework by which defence and security operations are legitimised and controlled in line with international human rights and humanitarian law. We have made clear that training delivered to the Burmese military will not contain any combat or combat related elements.

Burma

Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with his Burmese counterpart on the case of Bauk Ja.

Hugo Swire: On 22 November, I raised the issue of political prisoners with Minister for the President's Office, Tin Naing Thein, and made clear our concern about the political prisoners who are still detained in Burma. While I did not raise the individual case of Daw Bawk Ja, we continue to follow her case closely. Officials from the embassy in Rangoon raised Daw Bawk Ja's case with senior members of the Burmese Government in August, and remain in touch with local Burmese organisations which support her and the many other political prisoners who remain detained.

Cuba

Frank Doran: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with the US as part of the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement on the blockade of Cuba and existing sanctions on the EU businesses trading with that country.

Hugh Robertson: The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), has discussed the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Secretary Kerry and both are keen supporters of this Free Trade Agreement, worth up to £l0 billion to the UK economy. They have not covered Cuba in these discussions.

EU Enlargement

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which member states of the European Union are founding members of its predecessor organisation, the European Economic Community; and for those which were not founding members, what the (a) year was that the initial formal applications for member state status was made, (b) year was that application was formally accepted by the European Council, (c) time elapsed in months and years between (a) and (b) was, (d) year the terms of membership were formally agreed by the European Council was, (e) time elapsed between (b) and (d) was, (f) year was when the ratifications process of the relevant accession treaty was concluded, (g) time elapsed in years and months was between (d) and (f) and (h) what the year of accession if different from (f) .

David Lidington: The following table contains the technical dates and details as requested. The data in the table refers to Council processes rather than European Council processes as the treaties provide that applications for membership must be addressed to the Council and not the European Council.
	
		
			 Country (a) Application for membership (b) Council consideration of membership application (c) Time between (a) and (b) (d) Council Decision on accession of new countries (e) Time between Council consideration and Council decision on accession (years) (f) Final ratification of Accession Treaty (g) Time between Council Decision and final ratification (years) (h) Date of Accession 
			 Croatia 20 February 2003 14 April 2003 2 months 5 December 2011 8.5 21 June 2013 1.5 1 July 2013 
			 Romania 22 June 1995 17 July 1995 1 month 25 April 2005 10 20 December 2006 1.5 1 January 2007 
			 Bulgaria 14 December 1995 29 January 1996 1 month 25 April 2005 9 20 December 2006 1.5 1 January 2007 
			 Czech Republic 17 January 1996 29 January 1996 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 7 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Estonia 28 November 1995 4 December 1995 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 7.5 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Hungary 31 March 1994 18 April 1994 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 9 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Poland 5 April 1994 18 April 1994 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 9 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Slovenia 10 June 1996 16 July 1996 1 month 14 April 2003 7 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Latvia 27 October 1995 30 October 1995 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 8 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Lithuania 8 December 1995 29 January 1996 1 month 14 April 2003 7 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Slovakia 27 June 1995 17 July 1995 Less than 1 month 14 April 2003 8 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Malta 16 July 1990 17 September 1990 2 months 14 April 2003 13 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Cyprus 3 July 1990 17 September 1990 2 months 14 April 2003 13 21 April 2004 1 1 May 2004 
			 Austria 17 July 1989 28 July 1989 Less than 1 month 16 May 1994 5 30 December 1994 0.5 1 January 1995 
			 Sweden 1 July 1991 29 July 1991 Less than 1 month 16 May 1994 3 30 December 1994 0.5 1 January 1995 
			 Finland 18 March 1992 6 April 1992 Less than 2 months 16 May 1994 2 30 December 1994 0.5 1 January 1995 
			 Spain 28 July 1977 20 September 1977 Less than 2 months 11 June 1985 7.5 27 December 1985 0.5 1 January 1986 
			 Portugal 28 March 1977 5 April 1977 Less than 1 month 11 June 1985 7.5 27 December 1985 0.5 1 January 1986 
			 Greece 12 June 1975 24 June 1975 Less than 1 month 24 May 1979 4 25 June 1980 1 1 January 1981 
			 UK 2 May 1967 10 July 1967 Less than 3 months 22 January 1972 4.5 29 December 1972 1 1 January 1973 
		
	
	
		
			 Ireland 10 May 1967 10 July 1967 2 months 22 January 1972 4.5 29 December 1972 1 1 January 1973 
			 Denmark 11 May 1967 10 July 1967 2 months 22 January 1972 4.5 29 December 1972 1 1 January 1973

Human Rights

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has (a) made and (b) received on the findings on abortion and human rights in the report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, published on 1 February 2013.

David Lidington: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has not made or received such representations. We share the concerns of the Special Rapporteur about reports of:
	"abusive treatment and humiliation in institutional settings; involuntary sterilisation; denial of legally available health services such as abortion and post-abortion care; forced abortions and sterilisations; female genital mutilation; violations of medical secrecy and confidentiality in health-care settings, such as denunciations of women by medical personnel when evidence of illegal abortion is found; and the practice of attempting to obtain confessions as a condition of potentially life-saving medical treatment after abortion." (Section IVB, paragraph 46)

ICT

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many people are employed within centralised IT departments or teams in his Department; and if he will make a statement.

David Lidington: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) currently has 95 staff who are responsible for managing the Department's Information and Communications Technology (ICT) systems in the UK. This figure relates only to full-time FCO staff and does not include other staff such as outsourced contractors. To provide this information would incur a disproportionate cost.

International Organisations

William Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which international organisations the UK is a member of.

David Lidington: The UK is a member of a very large number of international organisations (IO). If all possible dimensions of UK membership are considered, this could potentially run into several hundred or even thousands. An indicative list includes:
	United Nations (UN);
	UN's specialised agencies (selected): Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), International Civil Aviation Organisation (1CAO); International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); World Bank; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO); International Labour Organisation (ILO), International Telecommunication Union (ITU); World Meteorological Organisation (WMO); World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO); World Health Organisation (WHO), Universal Postal Union (UPU), International Maritime Organisation (IMO); International Monetary Fund (IMF);
	North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO);
	European Union (EU);
	Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) (an IO in UK domestic terms but not in international law);
	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD);
	Council of Europe;
	World Trade Organisation (WTO);
	The Commonwealth (although there is a debate about its international legal status);
	Interpol;
	International Organisation for Migration (IOM);
	International Organisation for Standardisation (IOS);
	Australia Group;
	International Energy Agency (IEA);
	International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO);
	International Mobile Satellite Organisation (IMSO).
	As explained above, this is not a comprehensive list but an indicative selection designed to demonstrate the breadth of UK membership of IOs.

Iran

Robert Buckland: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his Iranian counterpart on providing equality for all Iranian citizens without discrimination based on race, gender or religion.

Hugh Robertson: The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), raised Iran's poor human rights record with Foreign Minister Zarif in the margins of the UN General Assembly on 23 September 2013.

Sri Lanka

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to ensure that the UK has international support before formally requesting that the UN Human Rights Council sets up an international inquiry into allegations of war crimes during Sri Lanka's civil war; what assessment he has made of whether it will be necessary for the UK to raise the issue at UN level; and if he will make a statement.

Hugo Swire: The Prime Minister was clear with the Sri Lankan President at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo in November that we expect real progress on human rights, reconciliation, accountability, and political settlement. The Human Rights Council will assess progress in March.
	In particular, the Prime Minister pressed for credible, transparent and independent investigations into alleged war crimes and made clear that if these investigations have not begun properly by March, then we will use our position on the UN Human Rights Council to work with the UN Human Rights Commissioner and call for an international inquiry. The UK has been voted back on to the Human Rights Council and will play an active role in building international support ahead of the March Human Rights Council session. We will continue to discuss Sri Lanka with a range of other EU, Commonwealth and international partners over the coming months.

Thailand

Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the security situation in Thailand following recent protests in that country.

Hugo Swire: There have been protests in Bangkok and elsewhere in Thailand, particularly around government buildings, since the beginning of November. I was sad to learn of the loss of life during those demonstrations over the weekend of 30 November to 1 December. As I made clear in my public statement of 25 November, the UK urges all parties to resolve their differences peacefully, avoiding violence, and in line with democracy and the rule of law. All sides have stated they are not seeking confrontation and want to avoid further violence.
	At present, there is no direct threat to UK businesses, tourists or commercial interests in Thailand, but we continue to monitor the situation closely.
	Our ambassador to Thailand is in regular contact with both Thai government and opposition leaders, and our officials in London are also in contact with the Thai embassy here.
	We have added factual updates to our travel advice throughout this period of protests and will continue to keep our advice under review.